4 ms·

$$$ PCs are expensive. You spent ~$1500 on a good uptodate setup. Now a Valve Index will cost another $1000. Not worth it for the niche.

ponyous 3y ago
You can buy a quest and don't need a PC for $300.
- croes 3y ago
  You only get mobile game graphics quality on a Quest headset
- willis936 3y ago
  That's a poor substitute. And also comes with Meta baggage. I can't speak for anyone else, but I will never invite a meta product into my home.
  - mellosouls 3y ago
    So you don't know it's a poor substitute then?
    - willis936 3y ago
      What makes you say that? Whether or not I buy one has no bearing over how much computational power a device has: which is what makes it a poor substitute.
      - mellosouls 3y ago
        It's not just about the computational power though, is it? It's a different type of platform and regardless, the second half of your comment ruled out the value of the first.
        willis936 3y ago
        Are you arguing that standalone headsets are not poor substitutes? For that to be the case they would have to do things like be able to play Half Life Alyx at acceptable visual fidelity.
        mellosouls 3y ago
        I'm arguing that you've made a pointless contribution by commenting on something you won't have in your home on principle; it speaks to a lack of experience and/or an evangelistic dismissal that disqualifies you from a reasonably impartial assessment. That you are also technically wrong is secondary.
        willis936 3y ago
        How can a point be inherently pointless? Yes or no: can a standalone headset play games like a PC-connected headset can? If yes, it is not a poor substitute. If no, then it is a poor substitute. This is the dichotomy I established with my comment.
  - Auracle 3y ago
    It’s not a poor substitute - in a lot of ways it’s one of the best VR headsets you can get. Once you go wireless there’s no going back, and there are plenty of standalone games that don’t need great graphics to be fun. I also don’t understand people’s aversion to Meta over Google, Amazon, etc. but that’s a personal choice.
    - BanazirGalbasi 3y ago
      > I also don’t understand people’s aversion to Meta over Google, Amazon, etc. Objecting to Meta specifically here is a response to VR suggestions. The other two companies are irrelevant in this conversation because neither has a VR headset available for use (that I know of). It doesn't help that the Oculus Quest is the cheapest VR option out there, so it gets suggested every time the topic comes up, so those of us who prefer to avoid the three companies you mentioned tend to have a quick response ready.
DRW_ 3y ago
The Quest headsets are standalone, only cost a few hundred dollars and are the most popular. PSVR only requires a playstation 4 or 5 (depending on PSVR or PSVR2) High end PC VR is expensive, yeah - but it's not been the only or even main choice for a while now.
- croes 3y ago
  >The Quest headsets are standalone, only cost a few hundred dollars and are the most popular. And you can't the graphic quality of a mobile game or need a extra PC to stream your content.
- moffkalast 3y ago
  Quests are a facebook data mining spyware machine, do you think they subsidize the low cost for fun? Why anyone would buy it, besides blatant ignorance, is a really good question. My opinion of Carmack has really cratered since he's been working at Oculus and peddling their anti-consumer adware crap. Besides even the very top end headsets are still pretty early in terms of tech. Extremely narrow tunnel vision FoV that doesn't even come anywhere close to the 210 degrees required for full human vision, pixels visible on most and if they aren't you'll need an incredibly expensive rig to run those crazy resolutions at 90 fps. Games are also really pricey for what you get since they're targeting a niche market which by definition has to be loaded to be able to afford the setup anyway and has a sunk cost to justify. It's the console experience on PC. Plus you need to mount the trackers and find a way to manage that big fat cable for the headset, it's just piles and piles of expensive hassle for what's mostly still a gimmick. I'm pretty sure it'll be pretty good a few generations of headsets in the future though, especially once on-the-level PC performance becomes more affordable and the game UX best practices improve. I'm glad the VR games industry is at least moving away from the dumb mandatory teleporting thing and letting people walk around normally now.
  - DRW_ 3y ago
    Ok, I wasn't making an argument for the Quest. I was making an argument against the idea that you need a $1500+ PC for VR, that's it. I don't have or want a Quest.
accrual 3y ago
Depends though. I want my $1500 setup for things other than VR, like 4K gaming. I bought the Index on pre-order because I was already using and abusing my Vive daily. I ended up only using the headset.

ponyous 3y ago

You can buy a quest and don't need a PC for $300.

croes 3y ago
You only get mobile game graphics quality on a Quest headset
willis936 3y ago
That's a poor substitute. And also comes with Meta baggage. I can't speak for anyone else, but I will never invite a meta product into my home.
- mellosouls 3y ago
  So you don't know it's a poor substitute then?
  - willis936 3y ago
    What makes you say that? Whether or not I buy one has no bearing over how much computational power a device has: which is what makes it a poor substitute.
    - mellosouls 3y ago
      It's not just about the computational power though, is it? It's a different type of platform and regardless, the second half of your comment ruled out the value of the first.
      - willis936 3y ago
        Are you arguing that standalone headsets are not poor substitutes? For that to be the case they would have to do things like be able to play Half Life Alyx at acceptable visual fidelity.
        mellosouls 3y ago
        I'm arguing that you've made a pointless contribution by commenting on something you won't have in your home on principle; it speaks to a lack of experience and/or an evangelistic dismissal that disqualifies you from a reasonably impartial assessment. That you are also technically wrong is secondary.
        willis936 3y ago
        How can a point be inherently pointless? Yes or no: can a standalone headset play games like a PC-connected headset can? If yes, it is not a poor substitute. If no, then it is a poor substitute. This is the dichotomy I established with my comment.
- Auracle 3y ago
  It’s not a poor substitute - in a lot of ways it’s one of the best VR headsets you can get. Once you go wireless there’s no going back, and there are plenty of standalone games that don’t need great graphics to be fun. I also don’t understand people’s aversion to Meta over Google, Amazon, etc. but that’s a personal choice.
  - BanazirGalbasi 3y ago
    > I also don’t understand people’s aversion to Meta over Google, Amazon, etc. Objecting to Meta specifically here is a response to VR suggestions. The other two companies are irrelevant in this conversation because neither has a VR headset available for use (that I know of). It doesn't help that the Oculus Quest is the cheapest VR option out there, so it gets suggested every time the topic comes up, so those of us who prefer to avoid the three companies you mentioned tend to have a quick response ready.

DRW_ 3y ago

The Quest headsets are standalone, only cost a few hundred dollars and are the most popular. PSVR only requires a playstation 4 or 5 (depending on PSVR or PSVR2) High end PC VR is expensive, yeah - but it's not been the only or even main choice for a while now.

croes 3y ago
>The Quest headsets are standalone, only cost a few hundred dollars and are the most popular. And you can't the graphic quality of a mobile game or need a extra PC to stream your content.
moffkalast 3y ago
Quests are a facebook data mining spyware machine, do you think they subsidize the low cost for fun? Why anyone would buy it, besides blatant ignorance, is a really good question. My opinion of Carmack has really cratered since he's been working at Oculus and peddling their anti-consumer adware crap. Besides even the very top end headsets are still pretty early in terms of tech. Extremely narrow tunnel vision FoV that doesn't even come anywhere close to the 210 degrees required for full human vision, pixels visible on most and if they aren't you'll need an incredibly expensive rig to run those crazy resolutions at 90 fps. Games are also really pricey for what you get since they're targeting a niche market which by definition has to be loaded to be able to afford the setup anyway and has a sunk cost to justify. It's the console experience on PC. Plus you need to mount the trackers and find a way to manage that big fat cable for the headset, it's just piles and piles of expensive hassle for what's mostly still a gimmick. I'm pretty sure it'll be pretty good a few generations of headsets in the future though, especially once on-the-level PC performance becomes more affordable and the game UX best practices improve. I'm glad the VR games industry is at least moving away from the dumb mandatory teleporting thing and letting people walk around normally now.
- DRW_ 3y ago
  Ok, I wasn't making an argument for the Quest. I was making an argument against the idea that you need a $1500+ PC for VR, that's it. I don't have or want a Quest.

accrual 3y ago

Depends though. I want my $1500 setup for things other than VR, like 4K gaming. I bought the Index on pre-order because I was already using and abusing my Vive daily. I ended up only using the headset.