19 ms·

Oculus Rift S

278 points by Stefan-H 8y ago

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
notus 8y ago
Higher resolution and built in tracking and only 400. Probably going to buy. Someone convince me not to
- electrichead 8y ago
  Facebook :)
- jorjordandan 8y ago
  Well there's no mechanical IPD adjustment, so if you have very wide or narrow set eyes, it will not work well for you. The LCD screen don't have the deeper blacks of the OLED screens of the rift. Frame rate is less. Other than that, I think it looks good.
  - saurik 8y ago
    Ugh... that (no mechanical IPD adjustment) made the Oculus Go entirely worthless for me :/.
- stetrain 8y ago
  Samsung Odyssey+ has higher resolution (1600 vertical) and mechanical IPD adjustment, and is often on sale for $300-400. The Samsung (like other Windows MR headsets) only has two cameras, so the Rift will probably do a better job of tracking the controllers when they're behind your head. The Samsung also has some comfort issues for some people, the Rift may be better there. Overall the Rift will probably hold up well here as a more well rounded package despite the slight drop in resolution, I'll be interested to try one if they get in-store demos. Also depends on whether you want to buy a VR headset from Facebook.
- prophesi 8y ago
  There's no timeline for when it'll be out, but personally, the Oculus Quest is my reason to hold off.
- veryworried 8y ago
  Wait for Valve's headset coming out later this year. Direct competitor to the Rift S, with higher resolution, 135 degree vision, and knuckles controllers that let you open and close your hand naturally. You'll be glad you did.
  - legitster 8y ago
    At this point, I do not have much faith in Valve's ability to ship products. Anyone excited about VR likely shouldn't hold their breath.
    - fossuser 8y ago
      I wanted to like the Rift given their more comfortable hardware, but the Vive was so much better (I had both briefly). - Full scale walk around the room support - Touch controls (at the time the oculus was still using xbox, though I've heard their new controllers are better) - Oculus headset intentionally leaks light through the nose - Vive had an external facing camera (not a huge feature, but nice to have) Has the oculus improved at all? This wasn't even considering the Vive Pro.
      - legitster 8y ago
        I went with the Rift because it was cheaper and (imho) way less ugly. - Rift room scale support is actually very good with extra trackers (a bit of a pain, but luckily extensions work well). - The Rift controllers are very, very good. Overall, I just liked the Rift as a polished product better. And they have had a great track record of improving the product and dumping money into quality content.
      - Ajedi32 8y ago
        The Rift S has all that out of the box. The OG Rift has also been able to do most of that since the Touch controllers released two years ago (full scale tracking with controllers that are arguably better than the Vive wands). You can also fix the light leakage problem (if you consider it a problem) by buying a third-party faceplate (the Widemo ones have a much smaller nose gap).
- saurik 8y ago
  > Someone convince me not to OK, I'll take a shot (using the simplest argument I have access to, without trying to sell you on something fundamentally different): the Oculus Quest, which uses the same controllers but isn't tethered to a PC and is coming out in the same "Spring 2019" timeframe, seems to be even higher resolution and also costs only $400 ;P... (edit) oh, and AFAIK the Quest will have mechanical IPD adjustment, a feature the Rift S apparently lacks (?!?), which is frankly an absolute requirement if you have a head that isn't exactly the average-sized head (I find the experience using the Oculus Go, which also lacks this feature, entirely unusable for even a couple minutes due to the distortion and blur, whereas I happily will spend hours inside of a Vive).
  - philwelch 8y ago
    > isn't tethered to a PC Can I tether it to a PC if I want to? My primary use case is PC gaming.
    - Brozilean 8y ago
      You should probably just get a Rift with the bases. I got mine for around 350.
      - philwelch 8y ago
        I have one; I just find the tracking pretty fragile. I often need to set it up again on a weekly basis.
        phs2501 8y ago
        This really makes me happy I went for a Vive. I stuck the lighthouses up near the ceiling, calibrated once, and it still works perfectly eight months later. And no USB cables. Hopefully they perfect inside-out tracking eventually but in the meantime the lighthouse system just works for me.
        philwelch 8y ago
- smacktoward 8y ago
  Is there actually any software compelling enough to make the hardware worth the expense? After the wave of interest that followed the release of the original Rift petered out, most developers seem to have dropped VR like a hot rock...
  - Ajedi32 8y ago
    Depends on what you like. For traditional shooters there's Onward and Pavlov, with a new AAA title from Respawn Entertainment coming later this year. For sports there's Rec Room, Echo Arena, Racket NX, Eleven: Table Tennis, etc. For single player experiences Lone Echo, Budget Cuts, Robo Recall, and coming later this year Defector, Stormlands, Lone Echo 2, Boneworks... honestly there's a lot.
  - nyolfen 8y ago
    vrchat
  - agar 8y ago
    Yes, the software library is very good, continues to improve, and 2019 will see significant new releases approaching AAA quality (according the the vendors, of course). Naturally, it depends on your interests. But my issue is lack of time to work through my library, not lack of compelling software.
  - Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
    If you like playing Poker, PokerStars VR is a blast. It's free (There's not even an option to pay money, and you only play with fake money) I've spent over 100 hours in it. Having the player interaction makes it so fun. Desktop online poker just feels like playing with bots.
  - w1nst0nsm1th 8y ago
    Microsoft Office VR
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
    Short answer: no. There's some stuff that convinces me of the potential (SuperHot VR), but the whole thing is still too much of an expensive pain in the ass to be worth the trouble.
- Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
  A lot of people are bringing up the fact that some headsets like the Oculus Quest aren't tethered to a PC. I'm here to say that being tethered to a PC is a feature, not a bug. The advantage to being tethered to a PC is processing power. Any standalone headset is going to be running purely off of batteries. That means there are MASSIVE trade-offs in processing power, especially for the graphics. The GPU in a standalone headset like the Oculus Quest is going to be about as powerful as your phone's GPU or a Nintendo Switch, meaning it won't hold a candle to the power of a mid-grade desktop GPU. Yeah, sure, games are going to be made with that in mind, but it will definitely limit the graphical quality. You might think "Well I don't care much about graphics", but you'll find many game devs unwilling to make a lower quality port of their game in order to support lesser hardware. In other words, there just simply won't be as many games made for the Quest as their will be for desktop. Every PC will have the power to run a Quest game, but Quest will not have the power to run every PC game.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - throwaway34241 8y ago
    The 'tether' part is a big deal though in addition to the cost. Having tried both, I would prefer less realistic graphics vs having to keep the cable position in the back of my mind (I don't think I quite realized how much it subtracts from immersion until it went away). If you can assume the system is wireless, I think that actually frees up game design quite a bit to involve more rapid movements around the play-space that might be impractical or dangerous with a cable. I think the future of PC headsets is wireless streaming to standalone VR devices (I'd much rather have one $400 device that can do both than pay for separate PC and mobile ones). I think Oculus said they were actually investigating wireless PC streaming for the Quest, but obviously that wasn't a design requirement up front so who knows if they will get it working. If they do get it working, it seems like that could basically kill sales for the Rift so I can see why they might not want to put too many resources into it.
martin_bech 8y ago
Looks great, nice to not need external trackers. Only thing missing for me, is the option for a single connection over usb-c, the so called VR-link present on some newer gfx cards.
zone411 8y ago
More info https://uploadvr.com/oculus-rift-s-official/ https://uploadvr.com/oculus-rift-s-official/, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vtryRHVg_I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vtryRHVg_I. Lower refresh rate, LCD screen, no foveated rendering seem disappointing.
JoshTriplett 8y ago
I really wish one of these VR headsets allowed direct use as a display without their special drivers, and provided tracking data without using their SDK.
- Sandvich 8y ago
  That's an option, but then we wouldn't have nice things like Asynchronous Timewarp / Spacewarp unless we want to shift the burden of doing that onto the rendering application. As someone who worked in VR before the Compositor was a thing, I welcome it with open arms. It's just easier for everybody. That said, it'd be nice if you didn't have to log into some account to make it happen.
  - JoshTriplett 8y ago
    > but then we wouldn't have nice things like Asynchronous Timewarp / Spacewarp unless we want to shift the burden of doing that onto the rendering application. Or onto common libraries and frameworks. And I can live without such features until then; if I don't use the SDK and I miss a feature that's in the SDK, that's on me. > It's just easier for everybody. Except people building Open Source VR applications.
    - andybak 8y ago
      There's Monado: https://monado.dev/ https://monado.dev/
- dave7 8y ago
  You can certainly use the PSVR (on PC) like this.
Sir_Cmpwn 8y ago
They promised Linux support and took money from people on that premise. Then, when they no longer needed us, they discarded us with empty promises of adding Linux support "in the future". Now they're shipping new products and - surprise - no Linux support. Oculus can shove it.
- tdhz77 8y ago
  I’m a follower of Professer Lessig concepts of open / free software. As such, Windows is a no-go. I wish an open source game manager / VR system existed.
  - cr0sh 8y ago
    There is (or was) open hardware and software out there; software has long been "open source" in the VR realm (ahem - REND386, for instance), and honestly Oculus and the Rift came out of the DIY VR realm. You can homebrew everything you want today, assuming you have or can acquire the skills, materials, and tools. If your skills are more on the software side, then it'll be harder. I don't know if it still exists (to purchase at least), but there is OSVR: http://www.osvr.org/ http://www.osvr.org/ Now - I know it looks "Windows Only" - but at one time, it did have Linux support, and the code is open source, supposedly: https://github.com/OSVR/OSVR-HDK https://github.com/OSVR/OSVR-HDK But you can see that repo is somewhat old - I'm not sure what if anything is going on. But anyhow: https://osvr.github.io/doc/installing/linux/ https://osvr.github.io/doc/installing/linux/ But then this: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/razer-abandoned-osvr-joined-openxr,36965.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/razer-abandoned-osvr-joine... Yeah - you'll probably have better luck homebrewing everything again. Dig out those old back issues of PCVR magazine, dust off your old copies of various DIY VR books, power up the 3D printer...
  - haagch 8y ago
    I would not recommend OSVR hardware at this time, but the effort for free software XR is still alive. With the recent provisional release of the OpenXR standard we at Collabora started making the code for our OpenXR runtime "Monado" public. It's not entirely complete right now and relies mostly on reverse engineered drivers that mostly miss positional tracking, but we are hoping to have something better to show for it soon. https://monado.freedesktop.org/ https://monado.freedesktop.org/ A short demo of the current status on a fully open source software stack using linux with amdgpu/radv, the godot engine and the libsurvive Vive driver: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eB-vVL-MPos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eB-vVL-MPos
legitster 8y ago
As a current Rift owner, this seems like a bit of a lateral upgrade: - IPD is fixed. - LCD display - Can't track hands behind you - Narrower FoV It seems this is comparable to the many WMR headsets already in the market. I would hope that the simpler design helps bring down the price though, I could see this overall being cheaper to manufacturer.
- Wowfunhappy 8y ago
  I'm really concerned about this setting a lower standard that software will be designed to. The inability to track hands behind you in particular. But maybe we lost that battle already...
- zamalek 8y ago
  > Can't track hands behind you This is a personal deal-breaker. The rest I can live with. I get it. There's much less hardware involved, there's much lower manufacturing costs, those savings can be passed down to the consumer, bringing us closer to that hypothetical VR mainstream moment. I agree we need more headsets with this technology. I've "grown up" with full tracking, though, and I'm used to it. It adds an additional layer of presence. I hope we don't get stuck with this downgrade on all future devices. Add Sixense to inside-out tracking and I'd be outright sold. That being said, I already own the Vive with its lighthouses, so I wonder if I could use the Vive controllers with inside-out tracking HMDs. I guess that all depends on how much drift inside-out tracking suffers from, and how feasible it is to calibrate the two platforms.
  - CraftThatBlock 8y ago
    Using 3 sensors you can track full 360°, it works very well with my setup
    - CraftThatBlock 8y ago
      By bad, I just saw that the trackers are now built-in. I wonder if they will allow adding additional sensors.
philwelch 8y ago
I bought an Oculus Rift a couple months ago, and this seems like a mixed bag. Per https://uploadvr.com/oculus-rift-s-official/ https://uploadvr.com/oculus-rift-s-official/ : > The original Rift used dual PenTile OLED panels for a total resolution of 2160×1200. Rift S replaces this with a single LCD panel with a resolution of 2560×1440...This provides a higher detail image with reduced “screen door effect”. However, you don’t get the deep blacks of OLED since LCD displays use a backlight. Currently my #1 primary use of Rift is Elite Dangerous. One thing I don't want to lose in an upgrade is the inky blackness of outer space. Higher resolution would be lovely, of course, but how much higher is enough? I'd prefer to hold out for a next-generation headset with high resolution and OLED. > The Rift used external USB sensors for positional tracking...Like the upcoming Oculus Quest standalone, Rift S instead uses onboard cameras for “inside-out” tracking. This is a godsend. Onboard cameras could also potentially help with more...dynamic parts of your surrounding environment. By which I mean, I have cats. So this is not only a huge improvement, but it's something that I think can enable future improvements. > No Physical IPD Adjustment Since my IPD seems to be at the extreme physical end of the current Rift, I don't think faking it with software is gonna work for me :( > The Rift featured integrated headphones....Rift S removes these headphones and instead...[s]ound is piped through the side straps directly to your ears. Having nothing against your ear makes sound feel more natural and lets you hear others around you, but the downside is it can be heard by others in the room and the audio quality may be lower. The headset also features a 3.5mm jack so you can use your existing headphones or any you buy in future. I think if I upgraded to Rift S, I would just use my headphones with it instead of relying on the side strap audio. I don't find the Rift headphones unnatural; they don't break immersion any more than having a massive visor strapped to my face. In total, I really wish there was a Rift S+ that had the innovations of the Rift S but not the compromises. As it stands I don't feel a burning desire to upgrade, but I wouldn't rule out switching brands if a better headset had the improvements of Rift S but not the feature regressions.
- Ajedi32 8y ago
  It seems to me the Rift S is targeted more at people new to VR, not at existing Rift owners. The focus seems to be mainly on making setup easier, and improving comfort and ergonomics, not on pushing the boundaries spec-wise.
babaeth 8y ago
I think it's very clear that Oculus engineering efforts are dedicated to standalone devices like Quest rather than PC VR headsets. Which makes sense if you want to get 1 billion people using VR.
adpirz 8y ago
For those with VR headsets of any kind: how often are you using it? Are we there yet with VR? If not, is it the hardware, the content, or both? For now, I'd define "there" as at least 0.5 * time spent on console or PC gaming per week.
- arthurcolle 8y ago
  Tracking is a joke with the Rift v1 (consumer version). Decent for a few hours and then randomly everything gets all screwed up, requiring a tracking reset which sometimes doesn’t even fix the issue. It’s way too involved to set up, and even following the instructions it takes sometimes 20 minutes to finally get the tracking sensors synced with the controllers and your System. I found that really frustrating and made it prohibitive for anything other than killing time. Furthermore, for some reason it always makes me set it up from scratch even if I haven’t unplugged the three different USBs (2x tracking, and one for the headset) needed to get the whole thing operational since the last use. Echo VR is super super fun to play, as one concrete example, but I’d say the Rift is still not good enough other than as a toy to show off to people. The driver updates are also absurdly huge. I didn’t use it for a month and I had a 14gb driver download (pretty sure it wasn’t any game/app updates) We are far away from VR being even in the comparable to general purpose “everyday” computing IMO.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - wilg 8y ago
    Something is definitely wrong with your setup. You should not experience any noticeable tracking errors on current hardware. Some combination of a bug, strange setup, or bad environment is going on here. Maybe you have a large mirror or pane of glass around your setup? Lots of things can go wrong.
  - andybak 8y ago
    > Tracking is a joke with the Rift v1 (consumer version). Decent for a few hours and then randomly everything gets all screwed up You are literally the only person I've heard this from.
unstatusthequo 8y ago
No eye tracking? HTC ahead of the game there it seems
- virtualritz 8y ago
  Yeah. I sold my Fove because no one is developing for this headset platform and after years there is no Linux or macOS SDK. I really hoped the importance of this feature was so obvious that no next gen. headset would ship anymore w/o it. So I'm kind of flabbergasted Oculus just did that with the Rift S.
an4rchy 8y ago
One of the biggest barriers to consumer adoption of VR seems to be the cost. Is there a reason why it doesn't make sense for the manufacturers to do a subscription service? Seems like everything from phones and consoles to game streaming subscriptions is the trend (and makes sense). If nothing else, it can help increase distribution and awareness -- at the end of the day, more people using the devices is probably gonna kick off more content creation and economies of scale to produce cheaper/better hardware. Thoughts?
- ZhuanXia 8y ago
  Neglecting inflation, amortization does not make it any cheaper.
  - rocky1138 8y ago
    I think it's fairly safe to say that for the general populace, that doesn't matter. If it's cheaper up front, people act like it's cheaper overall.
- pradn 8y ago
  I doubt if there's a strong market for VR even if a great headset was $50. Do people who are not enthusiasts really want to immerse themselves like this? A good chunk of the population doesn't seem interested even in game consoles. I imagine a subset of them are interested in VR gaming. Outside of VR gaming, there's little mainstream content designed for VR.
  - andybak 8y ago
    Potentially the audience for VR could be bigger than the audience for consoles as it opens up entire categories of non-gaming applications. Experiential, narrative, educational, social etc. I've had very positive responses to VR from people that have never had any interest in traditional gaming. Of course - whether this interest could be translated to purchase is a different question. Ease of use and cost would help as would a wide and diverse library of mainstream content. I think a good stepping stone would be pervasive VR in schools, libraries, galleries etc. to get people accustomed to the medium.
akhilcacharya 8y ago
I'm glad inside-out tracking is becoming the norm. Significantly easier to setup and still had pretty good performance (although on the 2-camera Windows MR models you can't reach behind your back but whatever). I think Windows MR is significantly underrated just for this fact. My question is, should I get this or just buy the Samsung HMD today?
sethammons 8y ago
I've used a Vive once (a guy at work brought one in). Little sensors at the corners of the room, headset, hand grips. It was really neat. How does this rank next to Vive? I've been thinking of getting one (my kids would love the 3-d "drawing" app I tried). I have a good PC, should I be looking at getting the Rift S? A Vive? Any suggestions would be great. Thanks!
- hannasanarion 8y ago
  The objects in the corners of the room aren't sensors with Vive, they're lighthouses. Vive's tracking system is inside-out, there's only one cable and it runs from your computer to your head. There need to be two lighthouses, and all they need is power and line-of-sight to each other Oculus's tracking system is outside-in, the stations in the corners of the room are cameras, and the headset has infrared lights on it. You need three base stations, and they all need to be connected to your computer in addition to the connection for the headset itself. Oculus has arguably nicer controllers (grips vs wands), but Vive is launching "knuckles" controllers soon so that relationship might flip. I chose Vive because of the close integration with Steam, easier setup with fewer wires, and more titles (at least at the time, idk about now). The screen door effect doesn't bother me, so the main feature of the Rift S isn't a draw for me.
  - rocky1138 8y ago
    I feel it's important to note that the vive will still function with just one base station, it just won't give you as much coverage. I use it this way in my office when I'm working on Potioneer since I have limited room and I'm putting it on and taking it off so frequently to test.
- FeralAlien 8y ago
  I worked in a VR lab at my university for a year before graduating so I got to experiment with a bunch of the current headsets (no Rift S though since it was just announced obviously). My personal take away is if you are going for the maximum immersion, have space and the money, go with the Vive or Vive Pro. The Rift (likely applies to Rift S as well since they are so similar) was more comfortable than the Vive for me at least and I liked the controllers more but the tracking quality was not as solid especially in even medium sized rooms. The visual quality on the Oculus is not quite where the Vive is either. Additionally the Vive is a pretty open platform so there are lots of third party accessories you can play with (once again if you can stomach the costs). I love using Vive trackers on my feet to track my foot motion so I could run in place in games to move. That kind of ecosystem doesn’t exist for Oculus. Additionally Valve will likely release new controllers soon with full finger tracking (and then you could use your old controllers as Vive trackers)
mikenew 8y ago
They really phoned it in on this one. No physical IPD adjustment, an 80hz LCD rather than the 90hz OLED, a very marginal resolution increase to 1280×1440 (which is still less than the $200 WMR headset I bought almost two years ago), and no FOV increase. The move to inside-out tracking means a more convenient setup, but it will lose tracking when you put your hands behind you (like shooting a bow, which just about ruins Skyrim VR)[1]. Small wonder Brendan Iribe left Facebook over this[2]. They clearly want to push their more casual all-in-one headsets and don't care much about the enthusiasts and gamers that helped get Oculus off the ground in the first place. Really hope Valve steps up this year with a decent headset + the Knuckles controllers. Nothing wrong with building headsets for the more casual consumers but why can't someone release a decent gen 2 headset with the upgrades that everyone has been wanting. 1: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/03/hands-on-with-the-new-399-oculus-rift-s-more-pixels-zero-cameras-better-fit/ https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/03/hands-on-with-the-new... 2: https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/279364-oculus-rift-2-canceled-co-founder-leaves-facebook https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/279364-oculus-rift-2-canc... EDIT: After a little more reading it looks like the Quest (their equally priced all-in-one headset) has a higher resolution and a physical IPD adjustment. What the hell are you even paying for with this? You get a worse headset for the same price that lacks all the onboard hardware?
- Ajedi32 8y ago
  On the other hand, there are a lot of things that were improved: - Slightly higher resolution (1080×1200 per-eye -> 1,280×1,440 per-eye) - Inside-out tracking - Guardian can be set up via video passthrough - More comfortable halo head strap (better weight distribution, more surface area) - Wider lens sweet spot - Fewer god rays (better lenses) - Less pronounced screen door effect (better lenses, RGB-stripe subpixel layout) - Low-latency stereo-corrected video passthrough (Passthrough+) - Headphone jack - Slightly longer cable (4m -> 5m) Not a huge upgrade of course, but that's probably why they called it the Rift S and not the Rift 2.
  - mikenew 8y ago
    I'm not saying you're wrong, but we're on year 3 of this brand new tech and it's "kinda better, kinda worse". Think about the iPhone in 2007 vs 2010. They can call it whatever they like; it's still an utter disappointment, at least to a gamer like myself. If we're going to get to a point where VR actually feels like virtual reality then someone is going to have to push the envelope, and it clearly isn't going to be Facebook.
paulcole 8y ago
Does anyone here use the "courtside" view of NBA/NCAA basketball games? How is it?
- pmtarantino 8y ago
  I watched some examples with the PSVR (PlayStation 4 VR) headset. It isn't that good. I never felt like I was sitting in the courtside, but probably because the quality of the video isn't that good. Also, it is very umcorfortable to keep moving your head to follow the plays. In real life you only move your eyes, not your head.
  - rrdharan 8y ago
    Thanks (for question and response) I had been wondering about this.. guess I'll wait for the next generation.
- philwelch 8y ago
  I watched an NBA game on the NextVR app and it was amazing. "Courtside" view is pretty useless, but the default view predominantly used the basket stanchion cameras, switching from end to end whenever the ball crossed half court. Getting a three-dimensional sense of the game was amazing. Looking around and seeing and hearing things you don't see and hear on TV was also great. FOV is still the main limiting factor, but mostly, the behind-the-basket camera angle lets you look around and get a much better sense of what's actually happening on the court--with the downside of actually having to look around.
- landtuna 8y ago
  I did this on the Gear VR (which actually has better resolution than the original Rift), and it was amazing. The streams would die once in a while, but it was SO fun to watch. You could switch around to different views while you were watching, too. Timeouts made me feel like I was there when they didn't cut to commercials. :)
davidhyde 8y ago
A significant portion of people (most maybe?) who are interested in this would like to see the specs and not some Apple inspired dumbed down web page with little actual substance about the product. Even apple gives you prominent access to tech specs. This page tries to get your email address three times. Very poor.
asciimo 8y ago
I would love to trade all these monitors for a virtual workstation. Every time there's new VR tech I hope that it's possible. 1280x1440 is definitely an improvement. I'm patient.
- andybak 8y ago
  You might be interested in the HP Reverb: https://uploadvr.com/hp-reverb-vr-4k-599/ https://uploadvr.com/hp-reverb-vr-4k-599/ It's not quite monitor-replacement territory but it's getting close.
  - josaka 8y ago
    When will we be in monitor-replacement territory? I try to edit text in each generation's headset, and it's still not viable. Curious what the threshold spec will be when I can launch a text editor and work in a VR environment.
- Koshkin 8y ago
  The weight is a big factor - even if you use the headset while lying on a couch, after an hour your face will look like raccoon's.
  - driverdan 8y ago
    As someone who's used VR headsets for hours at a time weight is not a factor, resolution is. The resolution is far too low. Font sizes have to be gigantic to be readable.
- Ajedi32 8y ago
  I think if you're looking for a monitor replacement you're going to need to wait for foveated rendering. That's when you'll start seeing mainstream headsets with ultra-high-PPD displays. Maybe another ~4 years or so.
  - jimrandomh 8y ago
    Not actually needed. Getting high enough res to replace monitors with small fonts does require a big increase in resolution, but rendering a virtual desktop requires a lot less computation per pixel than rendering a game with lighting and shading. Current-generation consumer GPUs should be sufficient, if the panels and optics get good enough.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
holoduke 8y ago
If money is not an issue and you like cockpit games then currently the pimaxvr 4k is the best. Highest fov and highest resolution.
- corysama 8y ago
  The Pimax 5K+ is winning all of the image sharpness reviews. The Pimax software is not winning any awards so far though.
butz 8y ago
Quick question about Oculus setup: do you need to install some proprietary drivers, register on Facebook, run some additional "launcher" software to play games on Steam?
- nuclear_eclipse 8y ago
  You need to install the Oculus software to use the Rift, but there is no requirement to have or link to a Facebook account, and afaik, never will be. To run software from outside the Oculus store, you simply go into the Oculus settings and flip a switch enabling external applications.
- GuB-42 8y ago
  A bit more details: - You need an Oculus account but it doesn't have to be linked to your Facebook account, in fact you don't need a Facebook account at all. The exception is Oculus Rooms, a VR social app. - Obviously there are proprietary drivers. And only Windows 10. I think you can use it in Windows 7 but it is not recommended. - You don't need the launcher. You can even run bare executables if you wish. The Oculus software still runs in the background though. Also, the Oculus launcher supports "unknown sources", that includes Steam games. - Oculus have their own store, but you can buy your games elsewhere if you prefer. They have a few good exclusives though. - Steam games have different levels of support. Some games available on Steam can make use of the Oculus API. These work just as well as native games (because they are) but you may need a command line flag. Games using the SteamVR API also work well, but there may be a few minor issues, like the sound not switching to the headset automatically and a small performance hit. Games that don't officially support the Rift usually work, with maybe a few controller issues.
trixie_ 8y ago
Here's your chance Valve.
bubbabojangles 8y ago
I invested in a HTC Vive Pro when it came out, it's looking to be a good investment as these Gen 2 (I should say Gen 1.6) VR HMDs are pretty lack luster. Pair it with the Wireless Adapter, it would be difficult for me to change to inside out tracking and move back to a wired connection. Granted, I've sold some internal organs and first born child to obtain all of these things.
criddell 8y ago
This is a bit off topic, but I was wondering if anybody that was given an NDA'd preview of the technology before the first version was released has ever commented exactly what it is that they were demoed? What was it that made everybody so excited to write big checks?
jdietrich 8y ago
Announced a day after the HP Reverb, which has most of the features of the Rift S but 2160x2160 per eye. https://www.roadtovr.com/hp-rever-hands-on-impressions-pixel-packed-new-bar-for-windows-vr-headsets/ https://www.roadtovr.com/hp-rever-hands-on-impressions-pixel...
- Ajedi32 8y ago
  It's also $200 more than the Rift S and only has 2 tracking cameras instead of 5. Not a bad product by any means, but unless resolution is your main concern I wouldn't consider it superior to the Rift S.
  - driverdan 8y ago
    Resolution is more important than the other changes on the Rift S.
    - Ajedi32 8y ago
      That's debatable. Controllers and tracking make a pretty big difference to the overall VR experience, and the Rift S has some pretty big advantages in that department.
    - krisroadruck 8y ago
      This. Until I can read text on the thing VR feels DOA. I got the original rift and it now sits in my closet collecting dust because the resolution is about 1/2 or maybe even 1/4th of what it needs to be to really be compelling. They need to up the resolution, figure out foveated rendering, improve the FoV and get me some dang gloves or at least a VR-ready keyboard (can see the thing in vr like you see the hand controllers). I care about these things far more than ditching the cord, inside out tracking (I'm not sure I want 5 cameras looking at everything in my room any time I am strapped in) or anything else.
  - rickdg 8y ago
    More importantly, it's not facebook.
jron 8y ago
John Carmack and his friends made it clear that they have no interest in the PC being a first class VR platform when they tossed Brendan Iribe to the curb. The Rift-s is a big fuck you to all of the hardcore early adopters that made the Rift a reality. I skipped gen-1 thinking gen-2 was right around the corner; unfortunately, three long years later the future truly looks like a "race to the bottom." VR is starting to feel like a cheap trick instead of something that promised the future of gaming - a toy that just collects dust on the shelf after playing a handful of crap mobile games. The state of the industry from my perspective: 1. The VR industry seems to think PC gaming is dead 2. Oculus hasn't released better HMD in three years: - Worse inside out tracking despite the need to be tethered to a PC anyway - A downgraded refresh rate of 80hz after claiming 120hz was the sweet spot - A single panel and a downgrade from OLED to LCD with no ability for IPD adjustment - Is outsourcing work from Lenovo instead of doing in-house RND - Scrapped headphones despite saying it was a critical feature of the OG rift - Rumored to have a slightly worse FOV than the OG Rift's already small FOV - Attempting to roll their own walled garden store - Owned by Facebook 3. HTC hasn't released a marginally better headset in three years: - Lenses are garbage despite the better display - Future headsets are adopting inside out tracking despite it having worse performance than lighthouse - Owned by HTC - Terrible support - Attempting to roll their own walled garden store 4. Pimax doesn't seem to have the manufacturing or support chops to deliver despite knowing exactly what the hardcore PC gamer wants 5. Valve can't seem to release anything - ever. What a shit show.
- dmix 8y ago
  People get so angry whenever VR is brought up. Are there not other companies besides Oculus to serve the higher-end VR market? What's wrong with a company focusing on a mainstream market? The waste of talent?
  - mattnewport 8y ago
    The new HP headset is surprisingly quite promising as a higher end option, I tried it out yesterday and the resolution is great but it is still using the standard Windows MR inside out tracking which is decent but not great, particularly when it comes to the tracking volume for the controllers.
stabbles 8y ago
It's a gamble when you're on a Facebook product website, and you have whitelist certain scripts for the page to render. On other sites I can just block everything that has to do with Facebook.
StillBored 8y ago
Hmm, I have a hard time understanding what advantage these all in one devices have over the various VR lens devices for random phones. That said i'm not really impressed with the basic rift device I have. Mostly because the core software seems like garbage. The first blue screens I've seen in over a decade were caused by it. Then there are all the non fatal problems like the fact that the software apparently wasn't tested on machines that go into standby regularly. Then there are the weird USB discovery issues the hardware/software has (the software wants everything plugged into different controller ports but can't seem to figure out the USB topology correctly 1/2 the time, meaning sometimes it works then it decides not to work unless the machine is rebooted/etc). I would say it generally works better than some of the stuff I used in the 90's but the resolution is strangely lacking given the price of the thing and other devices on the market. So that said, the core problem of VR making people nauseous definitely hasn't been solved with the basic rift. Pretty much everyone I've demoed it to gets sick on games/demos which involve first person perspective. OTOH, there are some pretty cool 3rd person games (witchblood, moss, etc).
- chillacy 8y ago
  You have to try a 6DOF system, it’s a totally different ballgame.
  - droussel 8y ago
    I don't know much about all those and I experienced VR (other then the Avatar movie) for the first time this weekend at my friend's place on his PSVR. I really enjoyed Moss and still felt ok after about 45 minutes. I tried a kind of light sim demo with crappy 1995 looking graphics afterward and I thought I was about to vomit 2-3 times while "flying". Anyway, what would be the difference between the PSVR and a 6DOF system?
thefounder 8y ago
No oled, no 8k, not even 4k...who wants this "upgrade"?
JabavuAdams 8y ago
I've been a VR dev since 2014, and market-share / adoption is a huge problem. To a first approximation, you can not make enough money to run a studio in VR, even 5 years after DK1. Ontario, Canada has a great system of grants for game developers, but they have basically stopped funding VR titles, because they don't make any money. All of the people I know who went off to found VR studios are trying to survive on service work, rather than making custom IP. Either that, or working as loss-leader departments in larger companies. It's worse than indie development, if such a thing were possible. So ... yeah ... bring on the users while there are still some VR developers left.
- jron 8y ago
  I know sim racing is somewhat of a niche industry but the demand for high end VR is absolutely there: NoVRNoBuy was pretty much the only regular comment you would see when Codemaster's was hyping Dirt Rally 2.0 So much so that this is the changelog from Assetto Corsa's latest release: Assetto Corsa Competizione - Early Access v0.2 - Fixed "No VR no buy" ... [1] There are about 100 threads on Dirt Rally 2.0 echoing the same [2] This is a community that spends $500 on a steering wheel and $500-$1000 pedals are always out of stock [3][4] That doesn't even include the $1000 direct drive wheels [5][6] or the handbrakes, shifters, triple mount displays, and $500-1000 dollar rigs [7] I won't even get into the motion rigs... [1] https://steamcommunity.com/games/805550/announcements/detail/1700564528976573193 https://steamcommunity.com/games/805550/announcements/detail... [2] https://steamcommunity.com/app/690790/discussions/0/1735466157769817790/ https://steamcommunity.com/app/690790/discussions/0/17354661... [3] https://heusinkveld.com/heusinkveld-march-stock-update/?v=7516fd43adaa https://heusinkveld.com/heusinkveld-march-stock-update/?v=75... [4] https://www.protosimtech.com/ https://www.protosimtech.com/ [5] https://www.fanatec.com/us-en/wheel-bases/podium-wheel-base-dd1-usa.html https://www.fanatec.com/us-en/wheel-bases/podium-wheel-base-... [6] https://augurysimulations.com/products/ https://augurysimulations.com/products/ [7] https://sim-lab.eu/product/p1-chassis/ https://sim-lab.eu/product/p1-chassis/
akivabamberger 8y ago
What's the best PC or laptop setup HN folk have found?
m3kw9 8y ago
I’m imagining a time when they can project enough resolution into your retina that can mimic a 4K TV at a distance constantly, that would be one of the killer apps
ledzep2 8y ago
I'm thinking Rift S has an awkward position. It's not a gen 2 for those who already jumped in for Rift. So no buying there. It doesn't lower the bars for those who hasn't jumped in as neither headsets or graphics cards are getting cheaper. Then where is the market share? Maybe a trade-in program could work. For the rift owners they get the upgrade for a discount. Then for the newcomers, certified pre-owned Rifts for a low price.
- ledzep2 8y ago
  I guess Rift S has lower manufacturing cost because it can share some parts with upcoming Quest. The same tracking, the same controllers. And since they are already heading in that direction, personally I'm curious to know the possibility of combining Quest and Rift S, or PC and standalone VR. My guts tell me it's possible. I'm excited about the idea of two in one VR, with which I can watch a movie in bed before sleep, or show it to friends at their places', and plug in a PC to play a full blown action game. Two headsets and two sets of controllers are really too much for these purposes. I don't mind two libraries of games/apps though. Windows 10 and XBox One are already sharing content. It should be possible for VR too.
dlukes 8y ago
Maybe it's just me, but "Oculus Rift" has always sounded like a Harry Potter spell to rip someone's eyeballs apart.

Oculus Rift S

278 points by Stefan-H 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

notus 8y ago

Higher resolution and built in tracking and only 400. Probably going to buy. Someone convince me not to

electrichead 8y ago
Facebook :)
jorjordandan 8y ago
Well there's no mechanical IPD adjustment, so if you have very wide or narrow set eyes, it will not work well for you. The LCD screen don't have the deeper blacks of the OLED screens of the rift. Frame rate is less. Other than that, I think it looks good.
- saurik 8y ago
  Ugh... that (no mechanical IPD adjustment) made the Oculus Go entirely worthless for me :/.
stetrain 8y ago
Samsung Odyssey+ has higher resolution (1600 vertical) and mechanical IPD adjustment, and is often on sale for $300-400. The Samsung (like other Windows MR headsets) only has two cameras, so the Rift will probably do a better job of tracking the controllers when they're behind your head. The Samsung also has some comfort issues for some people, the Rift may be better there. Overall the Rift will probably hold up well here as a more well rounded package despite the slight drop in resolution, I'll be interested to try one if they get in-store demos. Also depends on whether you want to buy a VR headset from Facebook.
prophesi 8y ago
There's no timeline for when it'll be out, but personally, the Oculus Quest is my reason to hold off.
veryworried 8y ago
Wait for Valve's headset coming out later this year. Direct competitor to the Rift S, with higher resolution, 135 degree vision, and knuckles controllers that let you open and close your hand naturally. You'll be glad you did.
- legitster 8y ago
  At this point, I do not have much faith in Valve's ability to ship products. Anyone excited about VR likely shouldn't hold their breath.
  - fossuser 8y ago
    I wanted to like the Rift given their more comfortable hardware, but the Vive was so much better (I had both briefly). - Full scale walk around the room support - Touch controls (at the time the oculus was still using xbox, though I've heard their new controllers are better) - Oculus headset intentionally leaks light through the nose - Vive had an external facing camera (not a huge feature, but nice to have) Has the oculus improved at all? This wasn't even considering the Vive Pro.
    - legitster 8y ago
      I went with the Rift because it was cheaper and (imho) way less ugly. - Rift room scale support is actually very good with extra trackers (a bit of a pain, but luckily extensions work well). - The Rift controllers are very, very good. Overall, I just liked the Rift as a polished product better. And they have had a great track record of improving the product and dumping money into quality content.
    - Ajedi32 8y ago
      The Rift S has all that out of the box. The OG Rift has also been able to do most of that since the Touch controllers released two years ago (full scale tracking with controllers that are arguably better than the Vive wands). You can also fix the light leakage problem (if you consider it a problem) by buying a third-party faceplate (the Widemo ones have a much smaller nose gap).
saurik 8y ago
> Someone convince me not to OK, I'll take a shot (using the simplest argument I have access to, without trying to sell you on something fundamentally different): the Oculus Quest, which uses the same controllers but isn't tethered to a PC and is coming out in the same "Spring 2019" timeframe, seems to be even higher resolution and also costs only $400 ;P... (edit) oh, and AFAIK the Quest will have mechanical IPD adjustment, a feature the Rift S apparently lacks (?!?), which is frankly an absolute requirement if you have a head that isn't exactly the average-sized head (I find the experience using the Oculus Go, which also lacks this feature, entirely unusable for even a couple minutes due to the distortion and blur, whereas I happily will spend hours inside of a Vive).
- philwelch 8y ago
  > isn't tethered to a PC Can I tether it to a PC if I want to? My primary use case is PC gaming.
  - Brozilean 8y ago
    You should probably just get a Rift with the bases. I got mine for around 350.
    - philwelch 8y ago
      I have one; I just find the tracking pretty fragile. I often need to set it up again on a weekly basis.
      - phs2501 8y ago
        This really makes me happy I went for a Vive. I stuck the lighthouses up near the ceiling, calibrated once, and it still works perfectly eight months later. And no USB cables. Hopefully they perfect inside-out tracking eventually but in the meantime the lighthouse system just works for me.
        philwelch 8y ago
smacktoward 8y ago
Is there actually any software compelling enough to make the hardware worth the expense? After the wave of interest that followed the release of the original Rift petered out, most developers seem to have dropped VR like a hot rock...
- Ajedi32 8y ago
  Depends on what you like. For traditional shooters there's Onward and Pavlov, with a new AAA title from Respawn Entertainment coming later this year. For sports there's Rec Room, Echo Arena, Racket NX, Eleven: Table Tennis, etc. For single player experiences Lone Echo, Budget Cuts, Robo Recall, and coming later this year Defector, Stormlands, Lone Echo 2, Boneworks... honestly there's a lot.
- nyolfen 8y ago
  vrchat
- agar 8y ago
  Yes, the software library is very good, continues to improve, and 2019 will see significant new releases approaching AAA quality (according the the vendors, of course). Naturally, it depends on your interests. But my issue is lack of time to work through my library, not lack of compelling software.
- Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
  If you like playing Poker, PokerStars VR is a blast. It's free (There's not even an option to pay money, and you only play with fake money) I've spent over 100 hours in it. Having the player interaction makes it so fun. Desktop online poker just feels like playing with bots.
- w1nst0nsm1th 8y ago
  Microsoft Office VR
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  Short answer: no. There's some stuff that convinces me of the potential (SuperHot VR), but the whole thing is still too much of an expensive pain in the ass to be worth the trouble.
Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
A lot of people are bringing up the fact that some headsets like the Oculus Quest aren't tethered to a PC. I'm here to say that being tethered to a PC is a feature, not a bug. The advantage to being tethered to a PC is processing power. Any standalone headset is going to be running purely off of batteries. That means there are MASSIVE trade-offs in processing power, especially for the graphics. The GPU in a standalone headset like the Oculus Quest is going to be about as powerful as your phone's GPU or a Nintendo Switch, meaning it won't hold a candle to the power of a mid-grade desktop GPU. Yeah, sure, games are going to be made with that in mind, but it will definitely limit the graphical quality. You might think "Well I don't care much about graphics", but you'll find many game devs unwilling to make a lower quality port of their game in order to support lesser hardware. In other words, there just simply won't be as many games made for the Quest as their will be for desktop. Every PC will have the power to run a Quest game, but Quest will not have the power to run every PC game.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- throwaway34241 8y ago
  The 'tether' part is a big deal though in addition to the cost. Having tried both, I would prefer less realistic graphics vs having to keep the cable position in the back of my mind (I don't think I quite realized how much it subtracts from immersion until it went away). If you can assume the system is wireless, I think that actually frees up game design quite a bit to involve more rapid movements around the play-space that might be impractical or dangerous with a cable. I think the future of PC headsets is wireless streaming to standalone VR devices (I'd much rather have one $400 device that can do both than pay for separate PC and mobile ones). I think Oculus said they were actually investigating wireless PC streaming for the Quest, but obviously that wasn't a design requirement up front so who knows if they will get it working. If they do get it working, it seems like that could basically kill sales for the Rift so I can see why they might not want to put too many resources into it.

martin_bech 8y ago

Looks great, nice to not need external trackers. Only thing missing for me, is the option for a single connection over usb-c, the so called VR-link present on some newer gfx cards.

zone411 8y ago

More info https://uploadvr.com/oculus-rift-s-official/ https://uploadvr.com/oculus-rift-s-official/, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vtryRHVg_I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vtryRHVg_I. Lower refresh rate, LCD screen, no foveated rendering seem disappointing.

JoshTriplett 8y ago

I really wish one of these VR headsets allowed direct use as a display without their special drivers, and provided tracking data without using their SDK.

Sandvich 8y ago
That's an option, but then we wouldn't have nice things like Asynchronous Timewarp / Spacewarp unless we want to shift the burden of doing that onto the rendering application. As someone who worked in VR before the Compositor was a thing, I welcome it with open arms. It's just easier for everybody. That said, it'd be nice if you didn't have to log into some account to make it happen.
- JoshTriplett 8y ago
  > but then we wouldn't have nice things like Asynchronous Timewarp / Spacewarp unless we want to shift the burden of doing that onto the rendering application. Or onto common libraries and frameworks. And I can live without such features until then; if I don't use the SDK and I miss a feature that's in the SDK, that's on me. > It's just easier for everybody. Except people building Open Source VR applications.
  - andybak 8y ago
    There's Monado: https://monado.dev/ https://monado.dev/
dave7 8y ago
You can certainly use the PSVR (on PC) like this.

Sir_Cmpwn 8y ago

They promised Linux support and took money from people on that premise. Then, when they no longer needed us, they discarded us with empty promises of adding Linux support "in the future". Now they're shipping new products and - surprise - no Linux support. Oculus can shove it.

tdhz77 8y ago
I’m a follower of Professer Lessig concepts of open / free software. As such, Windows is a no-go. I wish an open source game manager / VR system existed.
- cr0sh 8y ago
  There is (or was) open hardware and software out there; software has long been "open source" in the VR realm (ahem - REND386, for instance), and honestly Oculus and the Rift came out of the DIY VR realm. You can homebrew everything you want today, assuming you have or can acquire the skills, materials, and tools. If your skills are more on the software side, then it'll be harder. I don't know if it still exists (to purchase at least), but there is OSVR: http://www.osvr.org/ http://www.osvr.org/ Now - I know it looks "Windows Only" - but at one time, it did have Linux support, and the code is open source, supposedly: https://github.com/OSVR/OSVR-HDK https://github.com/OSVR/OSVR-HDK But you can see that repo is somewhat old - I'm not sure what if anything is going on. But anyhow: https://osvr.github.io/doc/installing/linux/ https://osvr.github.io/doc/installing/linux/ But then this: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/razer-abandoned-osvr-joined-openxr,36965.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/razer-abandoned-osvr-joine... Yeah - you'll probably have better luck homebrewing everything again. Dig out those old back issues of PCVR magazine, dust off your old copies of various DIY VR books, power up the 3D printer...
- haagch 8y ago
  I would not recommend OSVR hardware at this time, but the effort for free software XR is still alive. With the recent provisional release of the OpenXR standard we at Collabora started making the code for our OpenXR runtime "Monado" public. It's not entirely complete right now and relies mostly on reverse engineered drivers that mostly miss positional tracking, but we are hoping to have something better to show for it soon. https://monado.freedesktop.org/ https://monado.freedesktop.org/ A short demo of the current status on a fully open source software stack using linux with amdgpu/radv, the godot engine and the libsurvive Vive driver: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eB-vVL-MPos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eB-vVL-MPos

legitster 8y ago

As a current Rift owner, this seems like a bit of a lateral upgrade: - IPD is fixed. - LCD display - Can't track hands behind you - Narrower FoV It seems this is comparable to the many WMR headsets already in the market. I would hope that the simpler design helps bring down the price though, I could see this overall being cheaper to manufacturer.

Wowfunhappy 8y ago
I'm really concerned about this setting a lower standard that software will be designed to. The inability to track hands behind you in particular. But maybe we lost that battle already...
zamalek 8y ago
> Can't track hands behind you This is a personal deal-breaker. The rest I can live with. I get it. There's much less hardware involved, there's much lower manufacturing costs, those savings can be passed down to the consumer, bringing us closer to that hypothetical VR mainstream moment. I agree we need more headsets with this technology. I've "grown up" with full tracking, though, and I'm used to it. It adds an additional layer of presence. I hope we don't get stuck with this downgrade on all future devices. Add Sixense to inside-out tracking and I'd be outright sold. That being said, I already own the Vive with its lighthouses, so I wonder if I could use the Vive controllers with inside-out tracking HMDs. I guess that all depends on how much drift inside-out tracking suffers from, and how feasible it is to calibrate the two platforms.
- CraftThatBlock 8y ago
  Using 3 sensors you can track full 360°, it works very well with my setup
  - CraftThatBlock 8y ago
    By bad, I just saw that the trackers are now built-in. I wonder if they will allow adding additional sensors.

philwelch 8y ago

I bought an Oculus Rift a couple months ago, and this seems like a mixed bag. Per https://uploadvr.com/oculus-rift-s-official/ https://uploadvr.com/oculus-rift-s-official/ : > The original Rift used dual PenTile OLED panels for a total resolution of 2160×1200. Rift S replaces this with a single LCD panel with a resolution of 2560×1440...This provides a higher detail image with reduced “screen door effect”. However, you don’t get the deep blacks of OLED since LCD displays use a backlight. Currently my #1 primary use of Rift is Elite Dangerous. One thing I don't want to lose in an upgrade is the inky blackness of outer space. Higher resolution would be lovely, of course, but how much higher is enough? I'd prefer to hold out for a next-generation headset with high resolution and OLED. > The Rift used external USB sensors for positional tracking...Like the upcoming Oculus Quest standalone, Rift S instead uses onboard cameras for “inside-out” tracking. This is a godsend. Onboard cameras could also potentially help with more...dynamic parts of your surrounding environment. By which I mean, I have cats. So this is not only a huge improvement, but it's something that I think can enable future improvements. > No Physical IPD Adjustment Since my IPD seems to be at the extreme physical end of the current Rift, I don't think faking it with software is gonna work for me :( > The Rift featured integrated headphones....Rift S removes these headphones and instead...[s]ound is piped through the side straps directly to your ears. Having nothing against your ear makes sound feel more natural and lets you hear others around you, but the downside is it can be heard by others in the room and the audio quality may be lower. The headset also features a 3.5mm jack so you can use your existing headphones or any you buy in future. I think if I upgraded to Rift S, I would just use my headphones with it instead of relying on the side strap audio. I don't find the Rift headphones unnatural; they don't break immersion any more than having a massive visor strapped to my face. In total, I really wish there was a Rift S+ that had the innovations of the Rift S but not the compromises. As it stands I don't feel a burning desire to upgrade, but I wouldn't rule out switching brands if a better headset had the improvements of Rift S but not the feature regressions.

Ajedi32 8y ago
It seems to me the Rift S is targeted more at people new to VR, not at existing Rift owners. The focus seems to be mainly on making setup easier, and improving comfort and ergonomics, not on pushing the boundaries spec-wise.

babaeth 8y ago

I think it's very clear that Oculus engineering efforts are dedicated to standalone devices like Quest rather than PC VR headsets. Which makes sense if you want to get 1 billion people using VR.

adpirz 8y ago

For those with VR headsets of any kind: how often are you using it? Are we there yet with VR? If not, is it the hardware, the content, or both? For now, I'd define "there" as at least 0.5 * time spent on console or PC gaming per week.

arthurcolle 8y ago
Tracking is a joke with the Rift v1 (consumer version). Decent for a few hours and then randomly everything gets all screwed up, requiring a tracking reset which sometimes doesn’t even fix the issue. It’s way too involved to set up, and even following the instructions it takes sometimes 20 minutes to finally get the tracking sensors synced with the controllers and your System. I found that really frustrating and made it prohibitive for anything other than killing time. Furthermore, for some reason it always makes me set it up from scratch even if I haven’t unplugged the three different USBs (2x tracking, and one for the headset) needed to get the whole thing operational since the last use. Echo VR is super super fun to play, as one concrete example, but I’d say the Rift is still not good enough other than as a toy to show off to people. The driver updates are also absurdly huge. I didn’t use it for a month and I had a 14gb driver download (pretty sure it wasn’t any game/app updates) We are far away from VR being even in the comparable to general purpose “everyday” computing IMO.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- wilg 8y ago
  Something is definitely wrong with your setup. You should not experience any noticeable tracking errors on current hardware. Some combination of a bug, strange setup, or bad environment is going on here. Maybe you have a large mirror or pane of glass around your setup? Lots of things can go wrong.
- andybak 8y ago
  > Tracking is a joke with the Rift v1 (consumer version). Decent for a few hours and then randomly everything gets all screwed up You are literally the only person I've heard this from.

unstatusthequo 8y ago

No eye tracking? HTC ahead of the game there it seems

virtualritz 8y ago
Yeah. I sold my Fove because no one is developing for this headset platform and after years there is no Linux or macOS SDK. I really hoped the importance of this feature was so obvious that no next gen. headset would ship anymore w/o it. So I'm kind of flabbergasted Oculus just did that with the Rift S.

an4rchy 8y ago

One of the biggest barriers to consumer adoption of VR seems to be the cost. Is there a reason why it doesn't make sense for the manufacturers to do a subscription service? Seems like everything from phones and consoles to game streaming subscriptions is the trend (and makes sense). If nothing else, it can help increase distribution and awareness -- at the end of the day, more people using the devices is probably gonna kick off more content creation and economies of scale to produce cheaper/better hardware. Thoughts?

ZhuanXia 8y ago
Neglecting inflation, amortization does not make it any cheaper.
- rocky1138 8y ago
  I think it's fairly safe to say that for the general populace, that doesn't matter. If it's cheaper up front, people act like it's cheaper overall.
pradn 8y ago
I doubt if there's a strong market for VR even if a great headset was $50. Do people who are not enthusiasts really want to immerse themselves like this? A good chunk of the population doesn't seem interested even in game consoles. I imagine a subset of them are interested in VR gaming. Outside of VR gaming, there's little mainstream content designed for VR.
- andybak 8y ago
  Potentially the audience for VR could be bigger than the audience for consoles as it opens up entire categories of non-gaming applications. Experiential, narrative, educational, social etc. I've had very positive responses to VR from people that have never had any interest in traditional gaming. Of course - whether this interest could be translated to purchase is a different question. Ease of use and cost would help as would a wide and diverse library of mainstream content. I think a good stepping stone would be pervasive VR in schools, libraries, galleries etc. to get people accustomed to the medium.

akhilcacharya 8y ago

I'm glad inside-out tracking is becoming the norm. Significantly easier to setup and still had pretty good performance (although on the 2-camera Windows MR models you can't reach behind your back but whatever). I think Windows MR is significantly underrated just for this fact. My question is, should I get this or just buy the Samsung HMD today?

sethammons 8y ago

I've used a Vive once (a guy at work brought one in). Little sensors at the corners of the room, headset, hand grips. It was really neat. How does this rank next to Vive? I've been thinking of getting one (my kids would love the 3-d "drawing" app I tried). I have a good PC, should I be looking at getting the Rift S? A Vive? Any suggestions would be great. Thanks!

hannasanarion 8y ago
The objects in the corners of the room aren't sensors with Vive, they're lighthouses. Vive's tracking system is inside-out, there's only one cable and it runs from your computer to your head. There need to be two lighthouses, and all they need is power and line-of-sight to each other Oculus's tracking system is outside-in, the stations in the corners of the room are cameras, and the headset has infrared lights on it. You need three base stations, and they all need to be connected to your computer in addition to the connection for the headset itself. Oculus has arguably nicer controllers (grips vs wands), but Vive is launching "knuckles" controllers soon so that relationship might flip. I chose Vive because of the close integration with Steam, easier setup with fewer wires, and more titles (at least at the time, idk about now). The screen door effect doesn't bother me, so the main feature of the Rift S isn't a draw for me.
- rocky1138 8y ago
  I feel it's important to note that the vive will still function with just one base station, it just won't give you as much coverage. I use it this way in my office when I'm working on Potioneer since I have limited room and I'm putting it on and taking it off so frequently to test.
FeralAlien 8y ago
I worked in a VR lab at my university for a year before graduating so I got to experiment with a bunch of the current headsets (no Rift S though since it was just announced obviously). My personal take away is if you are going for the maximum immersion, have space and the money, go with the Vive or Vive Pro. The Rift (likely applies to Rift S as well since they are so similar) was more comfortable than the Vive for me at least and I liked the controllers more but the tracking quality was not as solid especially in even medium sized rooms. The visual quality on the Oculus is not quite where the Vive is either. Additionally the Vive is a pretty open platform so there are lots of third party accessories you can play with (once again if you can stomach the costs). I love using Vive trackers on my feet to track my foot motion so I could run in place in games to move. That kind of ecosystem doesn’t exist for Oculus. Additionally Valve will likely release new controllers soon with full finger tracking (and then you could use your old controllers as Vive trackers)

mikenew 8y ago

They really phoned it in on this one. No physical IPD adjustment, an 80hz LCD rather than the 90hz OLED, a very marginal resolution increase to 1280×1440 (which is still less than the $200 WMR headset I bought almost two years ago), and no FOV increase. The move to inside-out tracking means a more convenient setup, but it will lose tracking when you put your hands behind you (like shooting a bow, which just about ruins Skyrim VR)[1]. Small wonder Brendan Iribe left Facebook over this[2]. They clearly want to push their more casual all-in-one headsets and don't care much about the enthusiasts and gamers that helped get Oculus off the ground in the first place. Really hope Valve steps up this year with a decent headset + the Knuckles controllers. Nothing wrong with building headsets for the more casual consumers but why can't someone release a decent gen 2 headset with the upgrades that everyone has been wanting. 1: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/03/hands-on-with-the-new-399-oculus-rift-s-more-pixels-zero-cameras-better-fit/ https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/03/hands-on-with-the-new... 2: https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/279364-oculus-rift-2-canceled-co-founder-leaves-facebook https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/279364-oculus-rift-2-canc... EDIT: After a little more reading it looks like the Quest (their equally priced all-in-one headset) has a higher resolution and a physical IPD adjustment. What the hell are you even paying for with this? You get a worse headset for the same price that lacks all the onboard hardware?

Ajedi32 8y ago
On the other hand, there are a lot of things that were improved: - Slightly higher resolution (1080×1200 per-eye -> 1,280×1,440 per-eye) - Inside-out tracking - Guardian can be set up via video passthrough - More comfortable halo head strap (better weight distribution, more surface area) - Wider lens sweet spot - Fewer god rays (better lenses) - Less pronounced screen door effect (better lenses, RGB-stripe subpixel layout) - Low-latency stereo-corrected video passthrough (Passthrough+) - Headphone jack - Slightly longer cable (4m -> 5m) Not a huge upgrade of course, but that's probably why they called it the Rift S and not the Rift 2.
- mikenew 8y ago
  I'm not saying you're wrong, but we're on year 3 of this brand new tech and it's "kinda better, kinda worse". Think about the iPhone in 2007 vs 2010. They can call it whatever they like; it's still an utter disappointment, at least to a gamer like myself. If we're going to get to a point where VR actually feels like virtual reality then someone is going to have to push the envelope, and it clearly isn't going to be Facebook.

paulcole 8y ago

Does anyone here use the "courtside" view of NBA/NCAA basketball games? How is it?

pmtarantino 8y ago
I watched some examples with the PSVR (PlayStation 4 VR) headset. It isn't that good. I never felt like I was sitting in the courtside, but probably because the quality of the video isn't that good. Also, it is very umcorfortable to keep moving your head to follow the plays. In real life you only move your eyes, not your head.
- rrdharan 8y ago
  Thanks (for question and response) I had been wondering about this.. guess I'll wait for the next generation.
philwelch 8y ago
I watched an NBA game on the NextVR app and it was amazing. "Courtside" view is pretty useless, but the default view predominantly used the basket stanchion cameras, switching from end to end whenever the ball crossed half court. Getting a three-dimensional sense of the game was amazing. Looking around and seeing and hearing things you don't see and hear on TV was also great. FOV is still the main limiting factor, but mostly, the behind-the-basket camera angle lets you look around and get a much better sense of what's actually happening on the court--with the downside of actually having to look around.
landtuna 8y ago
I did this on the Gear VR (which actually has better resolution than the original Rift), and it was amazing. The streams would die once in a while, but it was SO fun to watch. You could switch around to different views while you were watching, too. Timeouts made me feel like I was there when they didn't cut to commercials. :)

davidhyde 8y ago

A significant portion of people (most maybe?) who are interested in this would like to see the specs and not some Apple inspired dumbed down web page with little actual substance about the product. Even apple gives you prominent access to tech specs. This page tries to get your email address three times. Very poor.

asciimo 8y ago

I would love to trade all these monitors for a virtual workstation. Every time there's new VR tech I hope that it's possible. 1280x1440 is definitely an improvement. I'm patient.

andybak 8y ago
You might be interested in the HP Reverb: https://uploadvr.com/hp-reverb-vr-4k-599/ https://uploadvr.com/hp-reverb-vr-4k-599/ It's not quite monitor-replacement territory but it's getting close.
- josaka 8y ago
  When will we be in monitor-replacement territory? I try to edit text in each generation's headset, and it's still not viable. Curious what the threshold spec will be when I can launch a text editor and work in a VR environment.
Koshkin 8y ago
The weight is a big factor - even if you use the headset while lying on a couch, after an hour your face will look like raccoon's.
- driverdan 8y ago
  As someone who's used VR headsets for hours at a time weight is not a factor, resolution is. The resolution is far too low. Font sizes have to be gigantic to be readable.
Ajedi32 8y ago
I think if you're looking for a monitor replacement you're going to need to wait for foveated rendering. That's when you'll start seeing mainstream headsets with ultra-high-PPD displays. Maybe another ~4 years or so.
- jimrandomh 8y ago
  Not actually needed. Getting high enough res to replace monitors with small fonts does require a big increase in resolution, but rendering a virtual desktop requires a lot less computation per pixel than rendering a game with lighting and shading. Current-generation consumer GPUs should be sufficient, if the panels and optics get good enough.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

holoduke 8y ago

If money is not an issue and you like cockpit games then currently the pimaxvr 4k is the best. Highest fov and highest resolution.

corysama 8y ago
The Pimax 5K+ is winning all of the image sharpness reviews. The Pimax software is not winning any awards so far though.

butz 8y ago

Quick question about Oculus setup: do you need to install some proprietary drivers, register on Facebook, run some additional "launcher" software to play games on Steam?

nuclear_eclipse 8y ago
You need to install the Oculus software to use the Rift, but there is no requirement to have or link to a Facebook account, and afaik, never will be. To run software from outside the Oculus store, you simply go into the Oculus settings and flip a switch enabling external applications.
GuB-42 8y ago
A bit more details: - You need an Oculus account but it doesn't have to be linked to your Facebook account, in fact you don't need a Facebook account at all. The exception is Oculus Rooms, a VR social app. - Obviously there are proprietary drivers. And only Windows 10. I think you can use it in Windows 7 but it is not recommended. - You don't need the launcher. You can even run bare executables if you wish. The Oculus software still runs in the background though. Also, the Oculus launcher supports "unknown sources", that includes Steam games. - Oculus have their own store, but you can buy your games elsewhere if you prefer. They have a few good exclusives though. - Steam games have different levels of support. Some games available on Steam can make use of the Oculus API. These work just as well as native games (because they are) but you may need a command line flag. Games using the SteamVR API also work well, but there may be a few minor issues, like the sound not switching to the headset automatically and a small performance hit. Games that don't officially support the Rift usually work, with maybe a few controller issues.

trixie_ 8y ago

Here's your chance Valve.

bubbabojangles 8y ago

I invested in a HTC Vive Pro when it came out, it's looking to be a good investment as these Gen 2 (I should say Gen 1.6) VR HMDs are pretty lack luster. Pair it with the Wireless Adapter, it would be difficult for me to change to inside out tracking and move back to a wired connection. Granted, I've sold some internal organs and first born child to obtain all of these things.

criddell 8y ago

This is a bit off topic, but I was wondering if anybody that was given an NDA'd preview of the technology before the first version was released has ever commented exactly what it is that they were demoed? What was it that made everybody so excited to write big checks?

jdietrich 8y ago

Announced a day after the HP Reverb, which has most of the features of the Rift S but 2160x2160 per eye. https://www.roadtovr.com/hp-rever-hands-on-impressions-pixel-packed-new-bar-for-windows-vr-headsets/ https://www.roadtovr.com/hp-rever-hands-on-impressions-pixel...

Ajedi32 8y ago
It's also $200 more than the Rift S and only has 2 tracking cameras instead of 5. Not a bad product by any means, but unless resolution is your main concern I wouldn't consider it superior to the Rift S.
- driverdan 8y ago
  Resolution is more important than the other changes on the Rift S.
  - Ajedi32 8y ago
    That's debatable. Controllers and tracking make a pretty big difference to the overall VR experience, and the Rift S has some pretty big advantages in that department.
  - krisroadruck 8y ago
    This. Until I can read text on the thing VR feels DOA. I got the original rift and it now sits in my closet collecting dust because the resolution is about 1/2 or maybe even 1/4th of what it needs to be to really be compelling. They need to up the resolution, figure out foveated rendering, improve the FoV and get me some dang gloves or at least a VR-ready keyboard (can see the thing in vr like you see the hand controllers). I care about these things far more than ditching the cord, inside out tracking (I'm not sure I want 5 cameras looking at everything in my room any time I am strapped in) or anything else.
- rickdg 8y ago
  More importantly, it's not facebook.

jron 8y ago

John Carmack and his friends made it clear that they have no interest in the PC being a first class VR platform when they tossed Brendan Iribe to the curb. The Rift-s is a big fuck you to all of the hardcore early adopters that made the Rift a reality. I skipped gen-1 thinking gen-2 was right around the corner; unfortunately, three long years later the future truly looks like a "race to the bottom." VR is starting to feel like a cheap trick instead of something that promised the future of gaming - a toy that just collects dust on the shelf after playing a handful of crap mobile games. The state of the industry from my perspective: 1. The VR industry seems to think PC gaming is dead 2. Oculus hasn't released better HMD in three years: - Worse inside out tracking despite the need to be tethered to a PC anyway - A downgraded refresh rate of 80hz after claiming 120hz was the sweet spot - A single panel and a downgrade from OLED to LCD with no ability for IPD adjustment - Is outsourcing work from Lenovo instead of doing in-house RND - Scrapped headphones despite saying it was a critical feature of the OG rift - Rumored to have a slightly worse FOV than the OG Rift's already small FOV - Attempting to roll their own walled garden store - Owned by Facebook 3. HTC hasn't released a marginally better headset in three years: - Lenses are garbage despite the better display - Future headsets are adopting inside out tracking despite it having worse performance than lighthouse - Owned by HTC - Terrible support - Attempting to roll their own walled garden store 4. Pimax doesn't seem to have the manufacturing or support chops to deliver despite knowing exactly what the hardcore PC gamer wants 5. Valve can't seem to release anything - ever. What a shit show.

dmix 8y ago
People get so angry whenever VR is brought up. Are there not other companies besides Oculus to serve the higher-end VR market? What's wrong with a company focusing on a mainstream market? The waste of talent?
- mattnewport 8y ago
  The new HP headset is surprisingly quite promising as a higher end option, I tried it out yesterday and the resolution is great but it is still using the standard Windows MR inside out tracking which is decent but not great, particularly when it comes to the tracking volume for the controllers.

stabbles 8y ago

It's a gamble when you're on a Facebook product website, and you have whitelist certain scripts for the page to render. On other sites I can just block everything that has to do with Facebook.

StillBored 8y ago

Hmm, I have a hard time understanding what advantage these all in one devices have over the various VR lens devices for random phones. That said i'm not really impressed with the basic rift device I have. Mostly because the core software seems like garbage. The first blue screens I've seen in over a decade were caused by it. Then there are all the non fatal problems like the fact that the software apparently wasn't tested on machines that go into standby regularly. Then there are the weird USB discovery issues the hardware/software has (the software wants everything plugged into different controller ports but can't seem to figure out the USB topology correctly 1/2 the time, meaning sometimes it works then it decides not to work unless the machine is rebooted/etc). I would say it generally works better than some of the stuff I used in the 90's but the resolution is strangely lacking given the price of the thing and other devices on the market. So that said, the core problem of VR making people nauseous definitely hasn't been solved with the basic rift. Pretty much everyone I've demoed it to gets sick on games/demos which involve first person perspective. OTOH, there are some pretty cool 3rd person games (witchblood, moss, etc).

chillacy 8y ago
You have to try a 6DOF system, it’s a totally different ballgame.
- droussel 8y ago
  I don't know much about all those and I experienced VR (other then the Avatar movie) for the first time this weekend at my friend's place on his PSVR. I really enjoyed Moss and still felt ok after about 45 minutes. I tried a kind of light sim demo with crappy 1995 looking graphics afterward and I thought I was about to vomit 2-3 times while "flying". Anyway, what would be the difference between the PSVR and a 6DOF system?

thefounder 8y ago

No oled, no 8k, not even 4k...who wants this "upgrade"?

JabavuAdams 8y ago

I've been a VR dev since 2014, and market-share / adoption is a huge problem. To a first approximation, you can not make enough money to run a studio in VR, even 5 years after DK1. Ontario, Canada has a great system of grants for game developers, but they have basically stopped funding VR titles, because they don't make any money. All of the people I know who went off to found VR studios are trying to survive on service work, rather than making custom IP. Either that, or working as loss-leader departments in larger companies. It's worse than indie development, if such a thing were possible. So ... yeah ... bring on the users while there are still some VR developers left.

jron 8y ago
I know sim racing is somewhat of a niche industry but the demand for high end VR is absolutely there: NoVRNoBuy was pretty much the only regular comment you would see when Codemaster's was hyping Dirt Rally 2.0 So much so that this is the changelog from Assetto Corsa's latest release: Assetto Corsa Competizione - Early Access v0.2 - Fixed "No VR no buy" ... [1] There are about 100 threads on Dirt Rally 2.0 echoing the same [2] This is a community that spends $500 on a steering wheel and $500-$1000 pedals are always out of stock [3][4] That doesn't even include the $1000 direct drive wheels [5][6] or the handbrakes, shifters, triple mount displays, and $500-1000 dollar rigs [7] I won't even get into the motion rigs... [1] https://steamcommunity.com/games/805550/announcements/detail/1700564528976573193 https://steamcommunity.com/games/805550/announcements/detail... [2] https://steamcommunity.com/app/690790/discussions/0/1735466157769817790/ https://steamcommunity.com/app/690790/discussions/0/17354661... [3] https://heusinkveld.com/heusinkveld-march-stock-update/?v=7516fd43adaa https://heusinkveld.com/heusinkveld-march-stock-update/?v=75... [4] https://www.protosimtech.com/ https://www.protosimtech.com/ [5] https://www.fanatec.com/us-en/wheel-bases/podium-wheel-base-dd1-usa.html https://www.fanatec.com/us-en/wheel-bases/podium-wheel-base-... [6] https://augurysimulations.com/products/ https://augurysimulations.com/products/ [7] https://sim-lab.eu/product/p1-chassis/ https://sim-lab.eu/product/p1-chassis/

akivabamberger 8y ago

What's the best PC or laptop setup HN folk have found?

m3kw9 8y ago

I’m imagining a time when they can project enough resolution into your retina that can mimic a 4K TV at a distance constantly, that would be one of the killer apps

ledzep2 8y ago

I'm thinking Rift S has an awkward position. It's not a gen 2 for those who already jumped in for Rift. So no buying there. It doesn't lower the bars for those who hasn't jumped in as neither headsets or graphics cards are getting cheaper. Then where is the market share? Maybe a trade-in program could work. For the rift owners they get the upgrade for a discount. Then for the newcomers, certified pre-owned Rifts for a low price.

ledzep2 8y ago
I guess Rift S has lower manufacturing cost because it can share some parts with upcoming Quest. The same tracking, the same controllers. And since they are already heading in that direction, personally I'm curious to know the possibility of combining Quest and Rift S, or PC and standalone VR. My guts tell me it's possible. I'm excited about the idea of two in one VR, with which I can watch a movie in bed before sleep, or show it to friends at their places', and plug in a PC to play a full blown action game. Two headsets and two sets of controllers are really too much for these purposes. I don't mind two libraries of games/apps though. Windows 10 and XBox One are already sharing content. It should be possible for VR too.

dlukes 8y ago

Maybe it's just me, but "Oculus Rift" has always sounded like a Harry Potter spell to rip someone's eyeballs apart.