5 ms·

Argh, the title of the post has the exact same amount of info as the article does. I was hoping for details on the changes to the hardware different from the cu

Argh, the title of the post has the exact same amount of info as the article does. I was hoping for details on the changes to the hardware different from the current dev kit. Or more importantly, I was hoping to read why I should still care when Valve's offering is planned to come out this year and is supposedly the bee's knees.

Phrodo_00 11y ago
The SteamVR page seays they will be releasing a developer's edition this spring. Is it supposed to be more or less the same as the consumer version? I'd figure it shouldn't be since they can use the feedback from the developer community, but I haven't heard anything about it.
- TheCraiggers 11y ago
  Found this about the Valve offering: "A developer edition is set to launch this spring, with the consumer version becoming available "later in 2015", which we guess means the same November release window as the other Steam kit." http://www.wareable.com/vr/htc-vive-vr-headset-release-date-price-specs-7929 http://www.wareable.com/vr/htc-vive-vr-headset-release-date-...
- Tepix 11y ago
  No, the consumer version will have a higher screen resolution and other improvements.
baggachipz 11y ago
If Valve's timing on their VR is anything like their timing for, well, everything else they do... I think the Rift will be out first.
- wlesieutre 11y ago
  Thankfully, Valve has HTC building the things instead of trying to figure out manufacturing by themselves. Maybe that's enough to get them off Valve Time.
  - zerooneinfinity 11y ago
    yea but you know they are going to want to push a half life 3 with it.
    - BinaryIdiot 11y ago
      Why? They actually said some time ago that they simply didn't have a full story for it and didn't want to push towards anything unless it was what they wanted. I'm not sure they would really care about pushing HL 3 with anything specifically.
      - zerooneinfinity 11y ago
        They've also said they've been waiting for technology that is palpable to what they did with the havok engine and source graphics in hl2 days. This seems to line up pretty perfectly, and I highly doubt they will just abandon the series at this point.
        BinaryIdiot 11y ago
        > I highly doubt they will just abandon the series at this point. Yeah I don't think they would abandon the series but the way valve works it seems to me they never really cared about pairing it up unless it's something they have to do (like source). Meaning it wouldn't be any type of forced pairing.
  - evv 11y ago
    You think throwing a brand new piece of hardware into the mix will accelerate the process?
- gibsonje 11y ago
  If Rift's timing is anything like Rift's timing for, well, everything they've done... I think the Rift will be released in 2017.
  - baggachipz 11y ago
    Totally agree... and yet, I still stand by my initial statement. :)
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
Tepix 11y ago
There is a little bit of extra information hidden inside the announcement: * They have an input solution and will reveal it in the next couple of weeks * The have improved the tracking and will now officially recommend standing experiences. All in all, a Q1 release date is somewhat sad but in the big picture it won't matter.
- danielcarvalho 11y ago
  That was exactly my takeaway from it. Even just the fact that it caters for standing experiences is a fairly big announcement on its own. Especially considering how exhaustively they stressed the fact that the Oculus Rift was a seated experience previously. One other takeway from this release, is that we will _probably_ be expecting technical specifications and details come E3. At least, it's alluded to.
- DanAndersen 11y ago
  I am curious how much of the change to allowing "standing experiences" was technical, and how much was legal. In previous Oculus demos, they would give standing demos yet all official interviews said that the Rift is a "seated experience." My guess was that they were always constrained by not only a limited tracking volume but also the potential for litigation if someone sues them for tripping and falling. The fact that the Vive very openly was advertising a stand-and-walk-around experience may have helped convince Oculus that the risk of litigation was outweighed by the need to not be giving a sense of inferior hardware.
  - staunch 11y ago
    From their talks and interviews, I've gathered that both John Carmack and Palmer Luckey have always been in favor of standing experiences. But...the early investor of Oculus is also the CEO, and he apparently has the weakest stomach for VR of anyone at the company. The hard line seems to have been set entirely by him. Doom and Quake both made many people nauseous. So do rollercoasters, 3D movies, and Telsa Roadsters. There's no reason to eliminate experiences that most people can thoroughly enjoy. Fortunately, the fun camp seems to have won finally.
drzaiusapelord 11y ago
I would like to know what kind of computer and graphics card I need to make this thing work. Yeah, a cheaper VR headset pricepoint is nice, but not if you're just unloading all the expensive components onto the buyer via a $1200+ PC purchase. Not to mention, as someone who suffers with motion sickness with traditional games, how will the Oculus work for me? Have they solved this riddle? Will they ever? This is also why I see Sony having great success with its Morpheus headset. The PS4 is cheap as-is ($399) and if you already own one, its a no-brainer to go with their product. I'd be really surprised if Oculus ever goes mainstream. It still looks like an uber-nerds hobbyist toy like a, say, 3D printer, which technophiles have been telling us for years would be mainstream by now and in "every kitchen." Carmack isn't stupid. He didn't sell to Zuck because he thought he'd be moving 10's of millions of product every year. He sold to Zuck because he knew that the shipping date doesn't really change things for Oculus. Its still a very rough road to mainstream acceptance and economic competitiveness. I can afford $299 for the headset, but I'm not interested in buying a super gaming box to make it work. Nor am I interested in being a beta tester for a technology known to be a bit wonky, cause motion sickness, have questionable 3rd party support, and Facebook ownership/integration/driver and API's TOS. This is what on top of what Valve is doing, which may just steal Carmack's thunder as they have everything they need to make this work: the store, no relationship with unrelated businesses like social networking, large customer base, community goodwill, game publisher relationships, a decade plus in the game selling world, etc. If both the Valve set and the Oculus set go for $299, I can't think of any reason to even consider the Oculus.
- dangerlibrary 11y ago
  Carmack is an employee, primarily writing code. The company is owned and run by other people.
  - drzaiusapelord 11y ago
    He had a huge amount of buy-in/ownership when he was brought on board and certainly had some level of executive decision making. I doubt he just gets a 1099 for $market_wage and goes home. He's swimming in stock and other perks. You don't hire him to sit locked in an office all day and not have say in your organization.

Phrodo_00 11y ago

The SteamVR page seays they will be releasing a developer's edition this spring. Is it supposed to be more or less the same as the consumer version? I'd figure it shouldn't be since they can use the feedback from the developer community, but I haven't heard anything about it.

TheCraiggers 11y ago
Found this about the Valve offering: "A developer edition is set to launch this spring, with the consumer version becoming available "later in 2015", which we guess means the same November release window as the other Steam kit." http://www.wareable.com/vr/htc-vive-vr-headset-release-date-price-specs-7929 http://www.wareable.com/vr/htc-vive-vr-headset-release-date-...
Tepix 11y ago
No, the consumer version will have a higher screen resolution and other improvements.

baggachipz 11y ago

If Valve's timing on their VR is anything like their timing for, well, everything else they do... I think the Rift will be out first.

wlesieutre 11y ago
Thankfully, Valve has HTC building the things instead of trying to figure out manufacturing by themselves. Maybe that's enough to get them off Valve Time.
- zerooneinfinity 11y ago
  yea but you know they are going to want to push a half life 3 with it.
  - BinaryIdiot 11y ago
    Why? They actually said some time ago that they simply didn't have a full story for it and didn't want to push towards anything unless it was what they wanted. I'm not sure they would really care about pushing HL 3 with anything specifically.
    - zerooneinfinity 11y ago
      They've also said they've been waiting for technology that is palpable to what they did with the havok engine and source graphics in hl2 days. This seems to line up pretty perfectly, and I highly doubt they will just abandon the series at this point.
      - BinaryIdiot 11y ago
        > I highly doubt they will just abandon the series at this point. Yeah I don't think they would abandon the series but the way valve works it seems to me they never really cared about pairing it up unless it's something they have to do (like source). Meaning it wouldn't be any type of forced pairing.
- evv 11y ago
  You think throwing a brand new piece of hardware into the mix will accelerate the process?
gibsonje 11y ago
If Rift's timing is anything like Rift's timing for, well, everything they've done... I think the Rift will be released in 2017.
- baggachipz 11y ago
  Totally agree... and yet, I still stand by my initial statement. :)
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

Tepix 11y ago

There is a little bit of extra information hidden inside the announcement: * They have an input solution and will reveal it in the next couple of weeks * The have improved the tracking and will now officially recommend standing experiences. All in all, a Q1 release date is somewhat sad but in the big picture it won't matter.

danielcarvalho 11y ago
That was exactly my takeaway from it. Even just the fact that it caters for standing experiences is a fairly big announcement on its own. Especially considering how exhaustively they stressed the fact that the Oculus Rift was a seated experience previously. One other takeway from this release, is that we will _probably_ be expecting technical specifications and details come E3. At least, it's alluded to.
DanAndersen 11y ago
I am curious how much of the change to allowing "standing experiences" was technical, and how much was legal. In previous Oculus demos, they would give standing demos yet all official interviews said that the Rift is a "seated experience." My guess was that they were always constrained by not only a limited tracking volume but also the potential for litigation if someone sues them for tripping and falling. The fact that the Vive very openly was advertising a stand-and-walk-around experience may have helped convince Oculus that the risk of litigation was outweighed by the need to not be giving a sense of inferior hardware.
- staunch 11y ago
  From their talks and interviews, I've gathered that both John Carmack and Palmer Luckey have always been in favor of standing experiences. But...the early investor of Oculus is also the CEO, and he apparently has the weakest stomach for VR of anyone at the company. The hard line seems to have been set entirely by him. Doom and Quake both made many people nauseous. So do rollercoasters, 3D movies, and Telsa Roadsters. There's no reason to eliminate experiences that most people can thoroughly enjoy. Fortunately, the fun camp seems to have won finally.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago

I would like to know what kind of computer and graphics card I need to make this thing work. Yeah, a cheaper VR headset pricepoint is nice, but not if you're just unloading all the expensive components onto the buyer via a $1200+ PC purchase. Not to mention, as someone who suffers with motion sickness with traditional games, how will the Oculus work for me? Have they solved this riddle? Will they ever? This is also why I see Sony having great success with its Morpheus headset. The PS4 is cheap as-is ($399) and if you already own one, its a no-brainer to go with their product. I'd be really surprised if Oculus ever goes mainstream. It still looks like an uber-nerds hobbyist toy like a, say, 3D printer, which technophiles have been telling us for years would be mainstream by now and in "every kitchen." Carmack isn't stupid. He didn't sell to Zuck because he thought he'd be moving 10's of millions of product every year. He sold to Zuck because he knew that the shipping date doesn't really change things for Oculus. Its still a very rough road to mainstream acceptance and economic competitiveness. I can afford $299 for the headset, but I'm not interested in buying a super gaming box to make it work. Nor am I interested in being a beta tester for a technology known to be a bit wonky, cause motion sickness, have questionable 3rd party support, and Facebook ownership/integration/driver and API's TOS. This is what on top of what Valve is doing, which may just steal Carmack's thunder as they have everything they need to make this work: the store, no relationship with unrelated businesses like social networking, large customer base, community goodwill, game publisher relationships, a decade plus in the game selling world, etc. If both the Valve set and the Oculus set go for $299, I can't think of any reason to even consider the Oculus.

dangerlibrary 11y ago
Carmack is an employee, primarily writing code. The company is owned and run by other people.
- drzaiusapelord 11y ago
  He had a huge amount of buy-in/ownership when he was brought on board and certainly had some level of executive decision making. I doubt he just gets a 1099 for $market_wage and goes home. He's swimming in stock and other perks. You don't hire him to sit locked in an office all day and not have say in your organization.