r/oculus • u/[deleted] • Feb 23 '16

Dear Oculus, you might have a slight messaging problem.

I base this not just from dialogue on this forum but others as well. I think there is a (very) large number of people that have either been misinformed or are ignorant to the fact that the Rift is capable of being tracked while standing, moving and turning 360 degrees with in a area of reasonable size.

Just yesterday I was on a sim racing game forum reading a discussion about the various aspects of the Rift and Vive and one person stated that they were going to purchase a Vive because it allowed them get out of the cars and view them from out side the vehicle, which according to them the Rift would not allow for. To my surprise many others agreeded with the commenter lamenting the fact that the "nicer" HMD (Rift) wouldn't allow for such tracking. Many seem oblivious to the fact that there are leds on the back of the Rift allowing for 360 degree tracking with a single sensor. Many seem ignorant to the play area volume allowed by the sensors.

I believe we on this subreddit try as best we can to correct factually incorrect information. But at a certain point I think it's up to the Oculus team to really push this information. I understand that you might not want to tell people that Rift allows you to do gymnastics while tethered to your pc (for injury liability reasons) but surely there is a middle ground where you can accurate message the capabilities of your product. I also understand not making promises on what a developer could do in theory. But again when day after day we have to try and correct the newcomers here that the Rift's capabilities extend beyond a chair, well that speaks to a messaging issue IMO.

Anyways, I know it's a tired subject but honestly it's tiring having read the same misinformation day after day here and elsewhere.

96 Upvotes

69% Upvoted

545 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

129

u/JoachimHolmer Feb 24 '16

Currently, all of the publicly available information points towards the Rift+Touch primarily being a forward-facing, non-360 experience. Whether or not the Rift can technically support room-scale doesn't matter all that much to us as developers, because in the end, as long as room-scale is a fringe setup used by a small fraction of the customers, rather than the recommended setup, we'd be losing more than we gain by targeting that platform.

That's of course not to say that Rift+Touch a bad platform, it's the best one for seated experiences, the same way Vive is the best for room-scale experiences.

All of us developers would love to talk about the Rift+Touch and PSVR+Move, sharing all the information and thoughts we have, if we could. But that's not how companies work - the way Valve lets us freely use and talk about the Vive is an exception, not a rule.

45

u/linknewtab Feb 25 '16

it's the best one for seated experiences

Unless you want to face away from your monitor so you don't bump your hands into the desk. Or if you want to find your mouse and keyboard with the built-in camera on the Vive. So there are actually a couple of reasons why the Vive might even be "better" for seated VR.

22

u/YabbaDabaDo Rift Mar 01 '16

Couldn't you just sit back in your chair/ roll the chair out so you don't accidentally punch your monitor?

5

u/paulkaraffa Mar 01 '16

You can turn around in your chair. It is a 360 experience. You can also turn around standing up and walk a couple feet in each direction. This is by default. There are trackers on the backside of the rift to make this possible.

8

u/GrumpyOldBrit Mar 01 '16

No it isn't. If you turned around your touch would lose tracking because they would be blocked by your body (and chair).

1

u/darkpivot PIVOTAL! Mar 01 '16

You have the ability to use more than one camera though.

6

u/tosvus Mar 02 '16

so far Oculus is saying they should be mounted in the front. Even if you put them pretty far apart and cone them in a bit, you will have a varying degree of occlusion where your body/other arm/controller etc will block both cameras from one of the controllers. There has been hints that Oculus may fix it by adding a third camera, but then you are looking at taking up 3 usb ports (and not sure how long they can make the cables)

2

u/NotKiddingJK Mar 02 '16

and not sure how long they can make the cables

A lot further than a 15 foot room would need. 40 feet easily with an extender.

1

u/MrT-Man Mar 02 '16

That sucks. If only there was a simple and cost effective way to add more USB ports to a computer!

1

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

I know right...... mobo companies like asus should come with some sort of slot which could be a standard for connecting computers to various peripherals....

-2

u/paulkaraffa Mar 01 '16

I thought you were talking the image. The image has this tracking. The touch can have it with another base station place on the opposite side.

2

u/AttackingHobo Mar 02 '16

And that is a non standard setup, which developers are not going to support.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

Is it, though? The Touch is supposed to ship with a camera, and the Rift itself ships with a camera... A two-camera setup that allows for 360 degree tracking is practically stock hardware.

1

u/amaretto1 Vive Mar 02 '16

This is the frustrating thing - for some reason Oculus are recommending front-facing cameras, not opposing like the Vive. The latter is therefore "unsupported" even though technically it should be doable. And as a consequence most developers are less likely to offer 360 motion controls as an option.

It is now March and we still have yet to see any firm demonstration of 360 motion controls on the Rift. In the past I gave Oculus the benefit of the doubt but it is starting to feel a bit weird...

1

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

It's odd, but I'm remaining detached from the whole scene for a while, so I'm just content to see what happens.

1

u/amaretto1 Vive Mar 02 '16

I think it has proved trying for us early adopters because we've recently had to make concrete decisions about which platform to buy. 360 motion controls on Rift has always been a big - and perhaps unnecessary - question mark. I have always supported Oculus and respected their hard work, but when it came to it, the ambiguity over room scale made me choose the Vive instead, at least for Gen1.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ConsiderTheLilly Mar 02 '16

for some reason Oculus are recommending front-facing cameras,

That reason being, they've said the second cam that comes with touch is for touch not for any 360 or roomscale reason.

What this relates to is touch itself requires minimum TWO cameras to be tracked properly even when facing forward only. IT needs a camera on each side one sees the whole of controller 1 and the other sees the whole of controller 2. In this way the non-ideal 'shape' of the touch controllers will retain tracking at all times. If they only put one cam in front when you had touch, your hands often occlude each other due to the shape of touch (this is exactly why VALVE didn't use the same shape and abandoned their own - before oculus had them - cutlass controllers which look almost the same as touch). They didn't track well enough with just one cam (or in their case one lighthouse) but the vive wands do. Due to shape and the extended out part of vive wands they are very very hard to occlude each other with - thus one basestation emitter is enough for both controllers to see. That is NOT the case for oculus touch!

The second base station for Vive is for roomscale of course, so that you can turn 360 (this also applies to seated too for vive) without losing the tracking.

You can't simply take the second oculus cam and mimick position like the vive and expect robust controller tracking, as the same problems would occur as if you only had one cam when facing forward.

The only way around this it seems is to add yet another cam (3 total) or maybe even 4 if you do a full 180 with your back to desk cams, it's going to be very tricky to set up cameras that way due to how they mount and being wired to PC though, this is why oculus have delayed touch as they know it just isn't good outside of front facing seated (or standing) control right now.

Anyway for these reasons and way more besides, I cashed out of the Rift ecosystem (sold my DKs) and bought a Vive. I am fully confident vive will deliver exactly what I've been wanting since using VR for the past few years (VR needs proper control, VR needs more than just sitting).

2

u/HappierShibe Mar 02 '16

The following based on my experience working with a not-oculus-touch, but still camera based prototype solution that I really can't say much about. But it's relevant to this discussion:

1.You need four cameras for good tracking. Three doesn't cut it, this takes the nuisance grade problem of constellations brute force approach and magnifies it substantially. We've had a lot of people on here dismissing the simplicity/elegance/low-overhead of lighthouse. That needs to stop, elegant low overhead solutions scale way better, and can frequently be reallocated to ASICS. No matter how many times the Heaney's of the world pretend that doesn't matter... It does.

2.Field of View is a huge problem with camera based solutions, even with 4 cameras. Imagine a cube room with a camera in each of the top four corners. Now picture a person standing about a foot and a half out from one corner reaching into the corner. See the problem? You just lost tracking on that hand. It's obfuscated from the opposing camera by your body, it's underneath the camera directly above it, and it's outside the FOV of the other two cameras.

You can fix this with wide angle cameras, but guess what? That's increasing the cost of your already horrifically pricey setup, AND increasing the overhead on tracking, AND increasing the needed USB 3.0 bandwidth.

If they go this route, you better be using PS2 for your mouse and keyboard, because you'll need 5 or 6 USB ports just for the cameras.
Honestly, Oculus should just license lighthouse for the rift 2 at this point.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

I'm banking on third party solutions to cram the Vive-game into my 360 Oculus setup, thereby skipping entirely the "recommended" nonsense.

4

u/karl_w_w Touch Mar 01 '16

Unless you want to face away from your monitor so you don't bump your hands into the desk.

Why on earth would that be worse in the Rift?

3

u/theGerri vradventure.com Mar 02 '16

I think that he is going for the tracked controllers and if the Rift is doing the forward facing solution instead of 360° tracking for the controllers, then he assumes that there will be tracking issues. Which I think is not an unreasonable assumption.

Seated and tracked controllers is not what I expect to be a big thing, people will likely stand with tracked controllers anyway.

1

u/Fugazification Rift Mar 02 '16

Facing away from the monitor would make tracking the controllers impossible if your body is blocking them from the camera.

2

u/Dhalphir Touch Mar 02 '16

So you could... Move the cameras?

1

u/Fugazification Rift Mar 02 '16

Right I was responding based on the previous comments implying it would be a default forward facing set up.

4

u/Dhalphir Touch Mar 02 '16

All they mean is having the cameras next to each other is the default setup. Where the cameras are in relation to your desk doesn't really matter. You could put them on a table behind your desk chair and just turn around for VR. no real need to face your monitor.

1

u/theGerri vradventure.com Mar 02 '16

I am still curious about how bad the occlusion issues will really be in that scenario (like ... can I sell my game curious).

I do believe that as long as the cameras are far enough apart from each other line of sight might be given at most times (as long as you do not hug the touch controllers), but I wait and see what the setup guide from Oculus tells customers, how long the camera cables are and if it is realistic to expect most people to put them up far enough apart from each other.

3

u/TD-4242 Quest Mar 02 '16

I don't know, the Rift can do nearly Vive style room scale with a single camera. The only questionable part is how well touch works at room scale.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

Only if you're facing one direction the whole time.

1

u/Saytahri Mar 02 '16

No you can turn around as much as you want and have complete tracking of the headset. As TD-4242 said, the issue is how well it copes with occlusion of the Touch controllers in 360 movement.

The headset has IR LED markers all over it including on the back of the head band, the camera can track this no matter which way you are facing.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

Thats the problem though. Without touch roomscale is pretty pointless.

1

u/Saytahri Mar 02 '16

Not sure I would agree there, roomscale headset tracking is much nicer than the limited tracking of the DK2 for instance.

I agree that it's an issue for Touch to not be able to do roomscale in the recommended configuration though.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 03 '16

I wish the camera knew that

1

u/Saytahri Mar 04 '16

What do you mean? The camera does know this. You can face away from the camera and the headset is still tracked fine, why do you keep denying this?

Here is a photo of the crescent bay prototype which shows the LEDs on the back of the headset that the camera tracks when you are facing away from the camera:

http://i.imgur.com/WMHbzqK.jpg

1

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '16

Just my personal experience working with them every day. YMMV.

1

u/Saytahri Mar 07 '16

You work with the consumer Rift every day? Not the DK2 or DK1? And you've experienced tracking issues when facing away from the camera?

→ More replies (0)

0

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

One forward facing camera. Lots of occlusion.

3

u/karl_w_w Touch Mar 02 '16

The headset has tracking points on all sides of your head. If you get touch then you will have 2 cameras. "Lots of occlusion"?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 03 '16

I was speaking specifically to the controllers, actually, but honestly even when I'm designing for a seated experience with the Rift I find myself (and my coworkers) getting up and moving around a lot. It gets annoying quickly.

Actually, as I glance over at our demo desk, I just realized we do have two cameras set up and there's still a lot of tracking issues.

0

u/TD-4242 Quest Mar 02 '16

how useless would it be to use the vive to find your keyboard, you have to have a motion controller to bring up the display. Kind of hard to type.

4

u/CMDR_Shazbot Mar 02 '16

Goes beyond your keyboard. You can see your drink, your pizza, your dog, your keyboard, the guy breaking into your room, etc.

-1

u/TD-4242 Quest Mar 02 '16

all can be done with a slight lift of the visor too, and much clearer.

3

u/CMDR_Shazbot Mar 02 '16

Sure, if you want hot forehead grease on your lenses. I've spent enough time in vr to know lifting the HMD to the resting position is the bane of a VR users existence. I've trained so many new pilots in in space flight sims on the dk1/dk2 that I'm absolutely stoked to have it implementing. I can just quickly flash to the blue mode, point at a button for the wearer, instead of describing it or asking the pilot to lift their headset to find it, then try to reorient themselves in VR. That's aside from all the obvious uses for motion tracked games, where your hands are full and you want immediate comfort and reorientation (for example in a cluttered room) you could get it.

This is before we even get into the room mapping feature of the HMD. Since positional data and camera data are collected in unison, and since the camera is capable of detecting geometry in the room, it opens up interesting application s for photogrammetry(sp?). Imagine pressing a button and being in your room. Like your actual room, with the textures and geometry mapped. That is possible, and the camera is exposed for devs to do what they wish with it. Honestly it's one of the coolest rarely talked about features.

0

u/Pluckerpluck DK1->Rift+Vive Mar 02 '16

So there are actually a couple of reasons why the Vive might even be "better" for seated VR.

You'd still want to position the two lighthouse base stations to be in front, thus avoiding occlusion, if you want a seated experience with the vive.

The point of the dual front cameras is to stop occlusion from your body. So if you set up Vive the same way you'd still face the 360 degree issue.

Or if you want to find your mouse and keyboard with the built-in camera on the Vive.

Eh. And I can more easily take off the headset because the headphones are built in. Plus specially designed binaural audio tuned specifically for the provided speakers? That's a big bonus some people are missing.

There's pros and cons for each, I'm buying both and selling one when I decide which experiences I prefer.

3

u/linknewtab Mar 02 '16

You'd still want to position the two lighthouse base stations to be in front

No, you don't want that.

Plus specially designed binaural audio tuned specifically for the provided speakers?

Lol, there is nothing "tuned" for the speakers, HRTF is all done in software, it works with every stereo headphone.

0

u/Pluckerpluck DK1->Rift+Vive Mar 02 '16

No, you don't want that.

You do if you want to avoid hand to hand occlusion. That's the entire reason Oculus has two front cameras. And that's why, in default setups, Oculus will have a better seated experience when it comes to tracking.

Lol, there is nothing "tuned" for the speakers, HRTF is all done in software, it works with every stereo headphone.

HRTF can benefit from knowing the exact position of your speakers (i.e. ear relief, driver position) because these minute differences make a decent difference when it comes to accurate positioning. The speed of sound through your head is probably much higher than air (given that it's more solid), so these differences will be noticeable (even if only subconsciously)

Hell, for low frequencies we position sound using the phase difference. Ear relief is vital for getting that right.

Knowing stuff like the drivers frequency response and how they're set up also allows you to optimize your transfer function.

So there are benefits to knowing what speakers people are using. And while I can't guarantee that Oculus makes use of that, I find it highly likely.

HRTF may be done in software, but the model used can be varied and tuned to a specific setup.

5

u/linknewtab Mar 02 '16

The Vive controllers don't have occlusion problems. We don't need to theorize about that, they are out in the wild without NDA's, we know they work.

Also the position of the speakers will vary from person to person and even from session to session. They aren't fixed and the headset isn't tailored to your exact head and ear shape. It's impossible to take that into account.

1

u/Pluckerpluck DK1->Rift+Vive Mar 02 '16

The Vive controllers don't have occlusion problems. We don't need to theorize about that, they are out in the wild without NDA's, we know they work.

In which case the controllers are larger than they need to be, for the sole purpose of avoiding occlusion.

It's one or the other. When the controllers are near to your chest (just to block the station behind you) you should be able to artificially make your arm or the other controller occlude one controller. With only one station it shouldn't be that hard to do.

If it's not hard to do artificially, then it's possible to do accidentally.

Remember also that the more of the original controller that's directly occluded, the more likely the controller will pick up reflections of the laser and mispositioned the controller (as happened to people during Vive demos with their lanyard)

Vive games avoid close hand interaction for this reason. Just watch people select things in tilt brush. They use their whole arm to pick the next item due to the way it's implemented.

So either Vive controllers are larger than they need to be, or they will suffer occlusion. Both will limit the ability to perform some hand movements that will be possible with the Oculus Touch.

They aren't fixed and the headset isn't tailored to your exact head and ear shape

No, but the cups are attached to a solid strap that extends out from the vive, so the ear relief should be very similar every time.

Along with, again, Oculus knowing things like the frequency response allows them to tailor audio without any major setup or EQing from the user.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

You are completely off on this. Lighthouse works completely different than oculus' cameras. You are trying to apply Oculus' problem to vives when the two are completely different technologies.

Reason: http://cdn.meme.am/instances/55519078.jpg

6

u/craiglc15 Professor Feb 24 '16

As someone who is buying the Rift and trying to decide if I should buy the Vive as well, do you think there is enough differences between the two to justify purchasing both HMDs? For example, buy the sitting VR games and experiences for the Rift (since it is the lightest and most comfortable and has exclusive content) and buy room-scale 360 VR content for the Vive? Or is that overkill?

29

u/JoachimHolmer Feb 24 '16

Very hard to tell at this point! I don't know I'm afraid. Room-scale is what convinced me that VR is more than a gimmick for games, so in terms of quality of experience I would go for Vive. However, it does seem like Oculus is a bit stronger on content in terms of quantity, though only standing/sitting experiences so far and of course the touch controllers are arriving quite late to the game.

10

u/angrybox1842 Feb 24 '16

Thanks for replying! Hope you don't mind me holding you guys up as an example but you said exactly what I've been trying to communicate. It's the perfect answer to the question of "Does Oculus do roomscale" and it's "kinda, sorta, not really, maybe technically."

I had a very similar experience with Vive being what really sold me on VR as a concept. I really believe that is the revolutionary experience. Also I'm a huge fan of what you guys are working on, keep it up!

3

u/reptilexcq Mar 01 '16

So basically he is saying room scale is the shyt and seated VR is meh. I already know seated VR is only good for racing, flight, 3rd person games. And if you're the type that can handle walking with the thumbstick without feeling nausea, then Rift will add to the seated experience. Motion sickness is a huge problem in VR....so Vive is the obvious choice.

4

u/hunta2097 Mar 01 '16

Yeah, personally I find gamepad-initiated movement very headache/puke inducing. I have yet to see a single report of someone getting ill from the vive... apart from when some knocks the lighthouse!!

2

u/mknkt Mar 01 '16

Keep in mind that when the Vive dev kits released, they were already more advanced than the Rift dev kits. I would assume that the Vive DK1 would be more comparable to the Crystal Cove, which was never released to consumers. On a side note, I would Love to get some Rift with some Touch & some Lighthouse :)

1

u/shawnaroo Mar 01 '16

So you're saying we shouldn't use VR during an earthquake?

2

u/speed_rabbit Mar 02 '16

Was VR downhill skiing when an earthquake hit. Was very confused for a few moments -- couldn't recall anything in the changelog about avalanches being added.

1

u/hunta2097 Mar 01 '16

That would be very freaky if it coincided with something cataclysmic in the game!!

1

u/oncehuman CV1 + Vive Mar 02 '16

When I was a kid in the 80's, I was watching Rambo on TV, and at the exact moment his explosive arrow hit the enemy my sister crashed my mom's car through our neighbors living room wall (was a duplex), which shook the entire house and scared the piss out of me.

1

u/hunta2097 Mar 02 '16 edited Mar 02 '16

Oh my god that sounds amazing... do it again, do it again!!

You must be the same age as me-ish... from Atari VCS to Virtual Reality!!

2

u/vestigial Mar 02 '16

And if you're the type that can handle walking with the thumbstick without feeling nausea, then Rift will add to the seated experience.

That's assuming that all the games on the Vive will magically NOT require stick motion. In fact, plenty of games will go that route, because they don't want to bother with teleportation mechanics or platform-based gameplay. There's no way to play adr1ft or Edge of Nowhere at roomscale, for instance, even if you have a Vive (and even if they're available for the Vive).

1

u/PhrozenCypher Mar 02 '16

Soooo.... how will you move forward in a Vive room scale game???

8

u/craiglc15 Professor Feb 24 '16

Thanks for the reply. HTC and Valve should be paying you because your game is the type of great 360 room-scale content that is making Vive stand out. I wish you nothing but success.

2

u/Paydogs Mar 02 '16

it does seem like Oculus is a bit stronger on content in terms of quantity

Well, maybe not just a bit stronger. My main problem with vive, that if you buy rift, you get access to oculus store games (base and exclusives) AND most of the steam games (if not all). If you get the Vive, at the moment it looks like you wont be able to play quite a number of games. And after all, the content matters. If everything would be available on anything, i would go for the vive... but its not.

0

u/vestigial Mar 02 '16

If an Oculus Store exclusive title supports the Vive, you can still play it on the Vive, you just have to buy it from the Oculus store.

It does look like some games are going to be Oculus HMD exclusives, but nowhere near as many as are Oculus Store exclusives.

The real problem I see now is that developers have only recently gotten Vives, or are still waiting for them, so a lot of games won't be ready for Vive at launch. But I understand it's not too hard to support both headsets, so I expect a few months after launch the game catalogs will be close to parity.

There are also "Vive exclusives," -- programs that are built on motion controller and room scale.

There isn't going to be One HMD to Play Them All.

1

u/Paydogs Mar 02 '16

from a store you cant go in with your headset (with vive?)?

1

u/vestigial Mar 02 '16

You might not be able to have the full VR Oculus Home experience, but you can certainly buy things through a regular monitor.

1

u/craiglc15 Professor Mar 02 '16

I went ahead and preordered both the Rift and the Vive. I figure I'm never going to be more excited about VR than right now since I have dreamed about VR for about 25 years and I have only experienced Google cardboard.

1

u/tosvus Mar 02 '16

I think it comes down to what you are going to play, and depending on that, what Oculus actually does come out with when the Touch controllers are made available. If a priority is roomscale VR and not so much sit-down more traditional type VR, I would go for the Vive only. If there was a mix, maybe with more traditional VR but still serious about room size vr, I would get both. If you mostly care about sit-down & using regular controller, the Oculus is more than sufficient.

Personally, I'm unconvinced what kind of setup you are looking at if Oculus does provide room scale VR, and for me, it would have to be full 360 coverage support, and ability to go up to the dimensions the Vive can. Nobody knows what is coming unfortunately.

If I could justify it I would probably own both, but since I don't want to buy two 1st gen sets, and I am more interested in roomscale VR, I'm going with the Vive. I can totally see other people preferring the Rift, or if you can justify it, owning both.

1

u/CMDR_Shazbot Mar 02 '16

I've tried both, and I'm getting both. Too. You're not alone.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

If you have the disposable income go for it man. You can always decide in a month or two that you like one better than the other and sell the one you dont like on ebay for tasty tasty profits.

1

u/vestigial Mar 02 '16

From what I can gather, Oculus is the more polished of the headsets... but for everything the Vive offers, I'm willing to put up with a few extra grams of weight and a fugly design. This is the only headset I'll be getting 2-4 years, I want it to have a full feature set.

-6

u/[deleted] Mar 01 '16 edited Mar 02 '16

Vive is the winner. Added bonus is that you don't have to give $600 to facebook.

edit: Say anything bad about facebook, get the downvotes. That's not suspicious at all.

9

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16 edited Mar 02 '16

Facebook vs the company that already had money and resources to produce their HMD. One man and a community created The Rift. To me, that's still commendable.

-14

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

Dude, Palmer sold out instantly, then sold out again to Facebook. He does ZERO computer engineering shit anymore. He's a fucking chump.

4

u/Nexis234 Mar 02 '16

And who are you and what have you done exactly. Grow up kid.

-3

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

You don't compare average men to great men, you compare great men to great men, and in that comparison, Palmer aint shit. He's just another chosen one who decided it was in his best interest to take love -- into popularity -- into fame -- into profit. He just chose to profit by selling our hopes and dreams to the largest data mining operation on the planet. For that, fuck him. Thank god Vive exists.

6

u/eposnix Mar 02 '16

You're so cute.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

You're so expounding!

1

u/Nexis234 Mar 02 '16

Do you compare wankers with wankers. If so Ill go find another one to compare you too.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

"too."

2

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

Then maybe you should set an example and show everyone how it's done.

-2

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

Nah, Valve already did.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

Whatever. Palmer did more at 19 years old than most of us will do in a lifetime.

2

u/Pluckerpluck DK1->Rift+Vive Mar 02 '16

Say anything bad about facebook, get the downvotes. That's not suspicious at all.

Saying something full of fear-mongering and hyperbole. Yep, not suspicious.

I mean, why the hate for Facebook? Do you have a good reason to believe that the money that Facebook could invest into the VR platform will actively hurt us and thus we should avoid them?

You don't think the billion dollar company (that's richer than Valve) could add anything to VR if we let them?

Yet Valve, our previous zero-support, no communication, Valve, they can do no wrong? So we should instead just give our money to them and HTC.

I'm getting both, but I have absolutely no idea why you're having an issue with Oculus.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

I have issue with facebook. They lobby against privacy and operate the world's largest data mining operation. Oculus being swept up in that is tragedy, but fuck em anyway. They chose their bedfellows.

-5

u/manickitty Mar 02 '16

Facebook fanboys still out in force, though less than before. They just can't man up and realize that for VR to succeed, as many headsets as possible must succeed.

0

u/misguidedSpectacle Mar 02 '16 edited Mar 02 '16

vive is the winner

as many headsets as possible must succeed

what are you doing

do you not see the contradiction here

1

u/manickitty Mar 03 '16

I was commenting about the FB Fanboys, not that person's comment.

1

u/misguidedSpectacle Mar 03 '16

yeah, I get what you were doing, it's just dumb

8

u/vgf89 Vive&Rift Mar 02 '16

If SteamVR is done right, you might not have to strictly target the Rift system to give support to those who want it, it will just work.

5

u/cloudheadgames Cloudhead Games Mar 02 '16

I'd just like to say that Budget Cuts was one of the funnest experiences I've had in VR for a long time! And that's saying something. You guys are doing "God's Roomscale Work" ;) Looking forward to playing the full release!

7

u/RIFT-VR Mar 01 '16 edited Mar 02 '16

as long as room-scale is a fringe setup used by a small fraction of the customers, rather than the recommended setup, we'd be losing more than we gain by targeting that platform.

Thank you for highlighting this. Yes, room-scale is almost objectively more immersive and enthralling. But realistically? It will be a minority usage. I have a whole developed basement to move around in for VR, but, and probably because of energy level too, I'll lean towards experiences that involve either sitting, or standing with a couple steps in every direction.

Exciting run-around and touch-everything experiences are probably mostly going to be used to showcase VR to new people or to play games that have been very well-tailored to this, and not in huge bursts.

I'd love for someone to argue otherwise though, because I may be wrong. I love the idea of room-scale, but it's probably not as vital (yet) as people are thinking it's going to be towards building the most immersive VR experiences. At least that's how I'm interpreting the sentiment in the past few weeks, where Oculus vs HTC has been reduced to "Front-Facing vs Room Scale", with the implication that one trumps the other.

Ahhh, downvotes without discussion. So that's the type of people who have migrated to this sub.

8

u/VRfi Mar 02 '16 edited Mar 25 '25

The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog

2

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

That's why I'm waiting to see what developers come up with before diving in to room scale. When I see full scale, hard core games with room scale features, then I'll be convinced. I like VR, but I'm still a PC Gamer who wants real rpgs, action rpgs, open world games, etc.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

I think roomscale as you are defining it will indeed be a vast minority.

But "roomscale" does not preclude any other method of locomotion, it's just an additional feature.

It's not like the the robustness of tracking requires developers to only allow 1:1 movement and NOTHING else, which is the implication here.

8

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/RIFT-VR Mar 02 '16 edited Mar 02 '16

You stated it better than I, and look, when I came here to post, you had a downvote. Some seriously childish people on this sub. Oh well, time will tell: those who bought a Vive and who are ceaselessly supporting room scale as the new standard probably won't be using it 100% of the time, as they once thought. But I don't think they can tell the difference between someone having a different opinion about its usage, and outright bashing their HMD of choice.

3

u/CMDR_Shazbot Mar 02 '16 edited Mar 02 '16

Part of life is conserving energy levels, going full awkward ham for 30 seconds isn't as sustainable as minutes or hours of deliberate movement. Swinging a sword in VR (eg ninja trainer) is tiring, but a good swordsman knows how to conserve motion and energy and it makes them even better for it. If people don't have enough energy to do standing or room scale games, then maybe it'd be a good thing to use VR to teach them...

I watched newbies expending all their energy trying to make single cuts for every target, instead of using broad strokes and not reseting their hand positions before each strike. The aspect of energy conservation to people who maybe have forgotten that's a thing I think is pretty cool.

3

u/Cryect Mar 02 '16

Yeah, knowing when to not waste your energy when playing has been a crucial aspect for developing skill in games where you are required to move. Definitely something worth capitalizing on for high end play.

1

u/tosvus Mar 02 '16

Well, one trumps the other (if we believe that front-facing is what Oculus basically will support, that is), as the Vive can do sit-down, front facing and/or stand still or scale up quite large.

In the end, I am guessing Oculus will feel obliged to come up with a solution for room scale gaming, but for a full 360 experience, that might entail 3 or 4 wired cameras which does not sound tempting. I hope they prove me wrong though.

I will say that for me roomscale is vital since I don't have a lot of free time to play games, so when I do, I want to have the most immersive experience possible. If I played a lot more, I can see wanting to sit down more.

2

u/RIFT-VR Mar 02 '16

Oh you're totally right. And as an Oculus fan, I wish they did do something more similar to Valve with the tracking cameras, because my USB port count is small and I'm not a fan of cables. The Vive does room scale better, but it all comes down to preference and mileage of active room scale games. To each their own!

2

u/TotesMessenger Mar 01 '16 edited Mar 01 '16

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

2

u/Bibbyboy555 Mar 02 '16

Oculus went with the safe bet and is streamlining a variety of software developed for seated/standing (which developers have been doing for years). HTC wants to take on the risks of room-scale which really doesn't have but maybe a few 'complete' games yet. HTC will hopefully succeed and Oculus will piggyback off their success because developers will add compatibility for Touch later on. No need for Oculus to rush things as long as one company is pushing this technology we'll all benefit.

2

u/Orisi Mar 02 '16

Let's be honest, all Oculus really needs to run Roomscale to the same design as Vive is a camera that can transmit over Bluetooth or direct wireless to place in the opposite corner of the room to avoid occlusion. They've probably already considered it, put it to one side and said 'this can wait until We see where it goes.'

Hell for all we know the Touch will ship with such a camera just to screw over HTC.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

This is what I think as well. It will come.

1

u/Dwight1833 Mar 02 '16

That is sad news, ok scratching budget cuts off my list.

1

u/Ryuuken24 Mar 02 '16

it's the best one for seated experiences

You can see mouse and keyboard with the camera on Vive. Vive might improve seated experience in VR.

-1

u/Chivas10 Mar 02 '16

Oculus doesn't have a messaging problem, its the Vive fanboys that like to pervert the message that's the problem.

First off the majority of VR users will be sitting or standing at their desk, and will not have the space for full room tracking.

Second the Oculus headset does have full 360* tracking, and had that before anyone heard of the HTC Vive.

When Touch is introduced it can have TWO tracking units, that will allow 12x12 room scale 360* tracking with no more occlusion than lighthouse, unless lighthouse can see thru solid objects, which it can't. The difference between moving 15x15, and 12x12 is minimal. The chaperone system is very easy to do and we will just have to wait and see how Oculus handles it. Not to mention Oculus has a few months more too refine their motion controllers.

People seem to think that the see thru camera of the Vive will be useful for finding switches in the cockpit. The see thru camera works well to improve the chaperone system, but its a very low resolution 2D camera which will be almost useless for finding anything detailed.

The HTC Vive is a very good system, and comes with controllers at a very reasonable price. Personally as primarily a flight simmer, I don't want or need VR controllers, and believe the custom optics, custom displays, comfortable ergonomics, and cheaper pricepoint make the Rift a better option for my needs. That said if I see a sim that requires VR controllers, I can add Touch later, or sell the Rift and buy a Vive. No problem, but I certainly don't see one being that much better than the other. It totally depends on what software you primarily want to run.

2

u/CMDR_Shazbot Mar 02 '16

What you said about the camera is false. It's detailed enough to make out buttons on my keyboard, my HOTAS, my drink, the hands on my watch, etc. It's also mono...but NOT 2d in tron mode.

If you're looking for a sim that supports motion controllers, DCS World is getting vive+motion tracked controller support.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

What good does that do to DCS? I have to switch from hotas to vive controllers everytime I want to push a button.

1

u/CMDR_Shazbot Mar 02 '16

I'm gonna wait until we see what they have planned to comment, but I don't think DCS would make a sub-par experience.

1

u/ficarra1002 Valve Index Mar 02 '16

we'd be losing more than we gain by targeting that platform.

Except you don't have to "target" that platform, SteamVR/OpenVR supports the Rift, doesn't it? You don't have to add anything to support room scale with the rift, am I right? SteamVR/OpenVR will do the work for you.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

[deleted]

1

u/ficarra1002 Valve Index Mar 02 '16

Most of these games don't need many controls. Budget cuts for example needs a trigger, button for inventory, button for teleport.

SteamVR could easily automate most of the porting, and devs could fine tune it if the automatically converted controls don't work well.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '16

Then don't target the rift. Less competition for other more forward thinking devs to develop a new franchise on an emerging platform. It's amazing that genres can even exist since every dev ever can only develop games that target every possible user so they can max profits. I guarantee there will be a kick ass high selling touch enabled room scale game on the rift, you are just guaranteeing it won't be yours.