Poll: Where are you on the VR adopter curve?

Comments closed
    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 4 years ago

    I think most people would agree, glasses free 3D monitors is more appealing than virtual reality. It is a powerful immersion device that effects more forms of media.

    I think a mentally healthy person sees the pit falls of virtual reality, as if existing games didn’t have enough power to rip us from our actual lives and strap us to a chair, VR seems like it would increase that 10 fold.

    I think tech like google glass, and Microsoft hololens will be the future. Stuff that allows us to get up from our seats and combine media with our physical world rather than continue to drive a wedge between the two.

    • BIF
    • 4 years ago

    I’m on the “probably not gonna” part of the curve.

    This stuff is amazing I’m sure, but much like typical college-regurg coursework based 95% on unproven theory and no practical experience, it really kind of bores me at the moment.

    Plus, I work a lot and don’t have time to play with this stuff even though it might be fun.

    • armadylan
    • 4 years ago

    I came back to see if they had fixed this poll….. Nope.

    • DeadOfKnight
    • 4 years ago

    I keep seeing 3D advertised on these headsets. Is this just 3D positional awareness in a virtual 3D environment or does this actually give the same illusion of depth as stereoscopic 3D on a TV/monitor?

      • psuedonymous
      • 4 years ago

      Both. There are several cues the human visual system uses to estimate depth. One of these is stereopsis/stereo disparity, which is that 3D movies stimulate. VR also stimulates this, and does it correctly (as long as you set your IPD correctly). As well as almost every other stereo cue, except for one: Accommodation. As the whole scene displayed is at a single depth (because the lenses focus the image at one depth, this is fundamental limit of single-lens optics and a flat display panel) both near and far objects are in focus at the same time. Accomodation is a fairly minor depth cue, so lack of it is not a huge problem.

      The big bonus of VR over desktop 3D is position tracking. This allows for parallax to change correctly as you move your head. You look around, and close objects move and far objects don’t, allowing you to ‘look around’ obstacles correctly.

        • GrimDanfango
        • 4 years ago

        If the eye-position-tracking that several companies are experimenting with in order to achieve foveated rendering becomes accurate/fast enough, games could use that info to simulate accommodation too. It might feel a little odd, as your eye will still be expecting to do the work that the computer is now doing, but it’d be interesting to see how much more realism it added anyway.

    • Ifalna
    • 4 years ago

    I’m the old fart yelling “GET OFF MY LAWN” from the balcony.

    On a more serious note: I have neither the will nor the money to play “early adopter”, so I’ll wait until these things become more mainstream and affordable.

    Though I don’t think VR will work with MMOs anyway…

      • Airmantharp
      • 4 years ago

      I think VR will work for a lot of things that we don’t really yet realize.

      So, take MMOs- if we skip the ‘simpler’ ones and get to say big raids in a complex MMO as our example, a high-resolution VR solution would allow you to see more information at once, while also being able to better track position and so on.

      Honestly, as this technology matures and evolves, I think we’ll see VR replace a lot of static screens as the preferred method for viewing any material with depth.

        • Ifalna
        • 4 years ago

        I think VR would feel pretty awkward for 3rd person scenarios.

        It’s probably great for 1st person though.

    • torquer
    • 4 years ago

    About half past vomit and almost to migraine.

      • djayjp
      • 4 years ago

      Curious what headset you used (?)

      • JonnyFM
      • 4 years ago

      Yeah I was looking for the *BLURRGGHH* option in the poll.

    • mcarson09
    • 4 years ago

    I’m not buying the broken promise that is the Oculus Rift.

    [url<]http://www.gamespot.com/articles/oculus-creator-you-ll-understand-why-the-facebook-deal-makes-sense-a-year-from-now/1100-6419039/[/url<]

    • TopHatKiller
    • 4 years ago

    what’s ‘meatspace’? Are you deliberately insulting me, or something?
    Naaahh. Wake me up anyone, when it actually works….

      • VincentHanna
      • 4 years ago

      I didn’t understand the option either. Meatspace as an alternative to VR must mean monitors and traditional viewing options, I suppose. Either that, or it means the ability to store it in the freezer, as in “I’d prefer more meatspace.”

      Either way, I picked it because the other options seemed lacking. I’m more VR curious than enthusiastic, and will remain so until it proves itself to be viable.

    • just brew it!
    • 4 years ago

    No VR for me so far, and no near-term plans.

    Until a little over a year ago my day job involved some pretty serious AR stuff though. Does that count? 😀

    • qasdfdsaq
    • 4 years ago

    Where’s the checkbox for “I already have an Oculus Rift”?

    • Fonbu
    • 4 years ago

    With the possibility of gravol being required for a few people to comfortable enjoy a VR experience without their stomach turning. Wouldn’t any of the accessories and peripherals have to have sensors to properly show up in the VR display because your entire vision is obscured by the screen of the headset? Also a fail safe mechanism to prevent over exposure to the VR world such as a timing mechanism to temporary shut off the VR headset and force someone to take a break?

      • JonnyFM
      • 4 years ago

      The Vive knows where its controllers are so you can reach out and take them.

    • wingless
    • 4 years ago

    Google Cardboard is a legitimate gateway drug into VR. Once you get a taste you can only imagine how amazing the Rift or Vive will be. I tried the original Rift dev kit and it was mind blowing even with the screen-door effect. I played a few games with it and that sold me. If you spent your money on a $600 rift instead a $600 27″ display you won’t be disappointed.

    • GrimDanfango
    • 4 years ago

    I’ve had the DK2 for quite a while, and even in its hacky prototype state, it’s bloody marvelous. That said, I haven’t preordered the Rift yet. If they’d landed anywhere close to their bandied $350 estimate, I’d probably have picked up a Rift and a Vive as soon as possible, just to compare, and maybe sell one off again if there was a clear superior (or kept ’em both for best compatibility)

    Alas, at $600… I’ve decided to wait and see what the Vive is like, and then probably choose which one to pick up at that point.

    I will be getting one though… if you’ve ever enjoyed racing sims, as far as I’m concerned VR is as essential a piece of equipment as a decent wheel. The difference is so stark that it quite literally turned me into a competent driver – I shaved several seconds off my typical lap times, and became far more consistent. It’s also absolutely thrilling at times.
    I imagine it’s a similar experience in flight-sims, and I’ll probably try to get into those at some point soon.
    Cockpit-based games are already a clear reason to buy. All other VR experiences will just be bonuses on top of that.

    • Hance
    • 4 years ago

    meh VR is going to be about as big of a hit as 3D tv’s were.

      • GrimDanfango
      • 4 years ago

      “It’s amazing, you have to try it!” – said no-one who bought a 3D TV…

      “It’s amazing, you have to try it!” – say quite a lot of people who actually bother to try VR before forming an opinion.

      3D television was a flop because it was conceived entirely as a gimmick to sell more TVs. Only marketing departments ever considered them revolutionary.

      VR actually *is* a revolutionary technology.

    • slowriot
    • 4 years ago

    I’m extremely interested but haven’t pre-ordered yet. I’m apprehensive about which VR headsets will work with which games and other potential compatibility issues or shortcomings.

    The hardware requirements seem like they will be intense in order to get an ideal experience. So I think regardless I will be buying the fastest Pascal or Polaris based GPU before any VR headsets.

    • Ninjitsu
    • 4 years ago

    I’ve only watched those youtube videos where you can move your phone around to change the camera angle. Other than that, I’m interested to see where it goes, wouldn’t mind it in the distant future when i’ll actually be able to afford it.

    At the moment, I’m sort of meh overall.

    • djayjp
    • 4 years ago

    I actually strongly feel that cardboard is doing a huge disservice to VR by poorly representing the medium to most people (over 1 million people have likely been exposed to VR through cardboard– far higher than any other means, save for possibly Samsung Gear). It’s doing a disservice because it’s horrendously unoptimized (low framerates– as low as ~5fps in Google’s own maps demo on the S6; image persistence; high latency and inaccurate and limited head tracking; non-adjustable eye compensation). This is the exact formula of a headache and vomit non-simulator and will greatly hurt the market to those exposed to it by them seeing it as something that can only be tolerated for a few minutes at a time and leaves one feeling worse off, if not completely sick.

      • mcnabney
      • 4 years ago

      Much like consoles doing a huge disservice to PC gaming community?

        • djayjp
        • 4 years ago

        Nah, cuz they don’t produce such a powerful negative reaction (relative to the, potentially, best the games or medium has to offer with PC). If anything, the consoles might get them to want to upgrade to high end gaming in the PC world, whereas cardboard likely completely turns them off the whole thing entirely.

        • VincentHanna
        • 4 years ago

        Consoles greatly benefit the PC gaming community in many ways, and the comparison is flawed because both Google Cardboard and Oculus Rift or Hololens are the same product, VR. Cardboard is just really, really bad VR.

        Consoles and PCs are only comparable in the sense that some of the IP overlaps sometimes.

    • Mat3
    • 4 years ago

    Where’s the option that says:
    Curious, but need to try a demo to know it’s not just another 3D TV.

      • Billstevens
      • 4 years ago

      Its definitely a totally different experience than 3D crap. But it needs to be tried. I would just caution if you feel put off by the resolution or FOV, try to play a good game with it and give it a chance. A lot of times the annoyance of a smaller than expected FOV will melt away once you get into the experience.

      • Airmantharp
      • 4 years ago

      Hell, I like 3D TV- well, sort of. If it were possible for TV’s to appropriately replicate the theater experience, which the UHD 4k standard will go a long way toward, then it would be great.

      As it stands, the active shutter glasses give me a headache (and I’m not sensitive to high-motion whatnot, but I could spot a 60Hz CRT from across the office out of the corner of my eye…), and the passive tech in my LG set (Panasonic panel, let that irony sink in) kills brightness and halves resolution.

    • HisDivineOrder
    • 4 years ago

    The most interesting thing about this poll is not the results (48% not interested, 26% interested but waiting being the top two results with cardboard being in third, and pre-orders at 8% being the top 4 results).

    The most interesting thing to remember here is that we’re talking about the enthusiasts here. This is the market that’s supposed to be making VR a success. The hardcore enthusiast is the target audience for a site like TR.

    If Oculus isn’t blowing US away, you can only imagine what it’s doing for the folks that aren’t used to going out and buying expensive PC parts and peripherals.

    Poor Facebook. They bludgeoned the golden goose to death before it got a single egg out.

      • Billstevens
      • 4 years ago

      I think this is expected. They still have an astronomical number of pre-orders, compared to their expectation, so I guarantee you they are happy. Only a small percentage of even tech savoy people are early adopters of unproven tech.

      I you want to look at it as cup half full, over 50% of the people on this site are interested in VR, and about 1 quarter of them have tried or are buying a first gen VR device.

        • HisDivineOrder
        • 4 years ago

        How do you know they have an “astronomical number of pre-orders?” Let’s put aside the fact that they’re not billing until they ship, which means people are ordering that don’t intend to actually pay when it comes time because they’ll cancel it and are just hedging their bets atm AND let’s put aside the scalpers that always jump on products like this only to put them on ebay later and get a rude surprise when no one buys it (ie., Xbox One)…

        Just because they sold out of units does not mean they sold a LOT. It only means they sold more than they manufactured. Seems like this “release” is just another round of beta testing that’s more open and advertised than previous “releases.”

        Unless you’ve seen sales numbers? If so, link?

    • crsh1976
    • 4 years ago

    Very dubious, very much in the ‘wait & see’ category – so much hype and unrealistic expectations at this point, aside from the hardware cost/requirements.

    I’d love to be proven wrong, tho.

      • Billstevens
      • 4 years ago

      Among Oculus purchasers the expectations are extremely realistic, but that is because most of us have owned or at least tried the first couple DK units.

      Without ever having tried VR, unrealistic expectations are more plausible.

        • crsh1976
        • 4 years ago

        Oh, but the hype is very real, and it doesn’t come from gamers/adopters either.

        As I said, I’d love to be proven wrong, but there’s so much biased hype getting generated to make this sell (not work, just sell) that it’s bound to have to come down before it can actually succeed.

    • Meadows
    • 4 years ago

    I agree with the others, this poll isn’t about where you are on the “curve”, it’s flat-out asking which company you picked out of the several.

    A “curve” would have options like “I’ve already been pre-release testing hardware for a while”, “I’ve preordered a device”, “I will wait for the final reviews to decide”, “I’m certainly not going to buy a device within 1 year”, “I would probably buy one, once a good game comes out for it” and probably a few others.

      • Billstevens
      • 4 years ago

      If they wanted a curve they would have asked on scale of 1 to 10, how likely are you to invest in a VR product 1st generation in 2016. Or something to that effect.

        • Meadows
        • 4 years ago

        No, that’s pretty nondescript and the time horizon is also short. My suggestions would’ve worked better.

        In fact, if it were up to me I’d just redo the whole poll, or at the very least replace “curve” with “spectrum” and then it’ll all make sense as it is.

    • davolfman
    • 4 years ago

    Needs an option for “I’ve got the kit to build an Edtracker but haven’t put it together yet.”

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 4 years ago

    Here is the thing with a product like this. It doesn’t work without PREMIUM kit. Given that, it will be expensive as we are seeing it is. Additionally the people who they are marketing to are highly financially anchored in the opposition.

      • Laykun
      • 4 years ago

      It’s almost like this is a piece of early adopter kit for enthusiasts.

    • meerkt
    • 4 years ago

    AR also sorta fits into the mix. CastAR, Microsoft’s HoloLens…

    • NTMBK
    • 4 years ago

    Even us over-spending tech crazy early adopters aren’t interested… VR is doomed.

    • EndlessWaves
    • 4 years ago

    Eh, It’s expensive and awkward with limited gameplay effects. It’s well down my list of technologies I’d like to see supported by games.

    Unless it really takes off and gets lots of exclusive games I can’t see myself ever buying one.

    Personally I’m most looking forward to force simulation technology being supported by games, a 3D haptic controller is far more exciting gameplay-wise.

      • psuedonymous
      • 4 years ago

      [quote<]Personally I'm most looking forward to force simulation technology being supported by games, a 3D haptic controller is far more exciting gameplay-wise.[/quote<]The Novint Falcon says hello. Haptics are a very hard problem, and unlike HMDs there's no clear path to solving it yet. Even 100k+ industrial/research rigs like the Cybergrasp Haptic Workstation leave a lot to be desired in terms of functionality and usability.

        • EndlessWaves
        • 4 years ago

        I own a Novint Falcon. The tech may need work for precision use, but it’s definitely at the point where it has a lot to offer for games. A lock picking mini-game where you’re actually rotating the pick and physically feeling the strain on it is a lot less gimmicky than the current sort.

        It requires a lot of work from game developers though, so it’ll need a big push or some dedicated support before it builds the critical mass to keep going on it’s own.

    • AJSB
    • 4 years ago

    I had to vote in the “Meatspace” option because there’s no option “NO, Thanks” witch is ridiculous…
    …and taking in account results of Poll, VAST MAJORITY voted in that option and seem have NO INTEREST in VR…NOT a surprise to me.

    • Chrispy_
    • 4 years ago

    Where’s the option for:

    [quote<]"Done most of these already, interest peaked before VR was ready for primetime, now disinterested and have moved on already"[/quote<] ?

    • travbrad
    • 4 years ago

    Like a lot of people I’m interested in VR but not version 1.0. I’ll wait till the whole experience is more polished and maybe even better and cheaper. I also want to see how game support pans out for Vive vs Oculus, which is the better experience, and weigh that against the cost and ease of setup.

      • f0d
      • 4 years ago

      yep pretty much what im doing
      you would be silly getting either one without some kind of comparison first imo

      i like the idea of VR but i can be patient and wait for the best experience

    • ronch
    • 4 years ago

    There might as well be only two choices above:

    1. I’m in it already
    2. No thanks.

    • DoomGuy64
    • 4 years ago

    Not touching VR until they support adaptive refresh, and it’s hit mainstream affordable prices. Early adopters will just be paying inflated prices and getting limited tech. VR 2.0 is where it should get good.

      • Laykun
      • 4 years ago

      Adaptive refresh isn’t compatible with low persistence, which is much more important. VR headsets use a layered compositor though that runs at a constant 90fps with a high priority graphics context and if you miss a few frames it uses time asynchronous time warp to help fake those missing frames. Basically when your FPS dips you’ll see the in game animation of characters and the likes judder a bit, but the rotational (and even positional, but experimental) movement of your head still feels consistent and fluid as to not give you motion sickness. Basically Adaptive refresh makes no sense in the context of VR.

      [url<]https://developer.oculus.com/blog/asynchronous-timewarp-examined/[/url<]

    • psuedonymous
    • 4 years ago

    Needs a multi-selection box: Rift on pre-order (via Kickstarter), Touch to be ordered when avaialable, Vive to be ordered when released, PSVR to be ordered on release, DK1 and DK2 already on my desk.
    STEM on order, Cyberith on order, Perception Neuron suit is here (but I haven’t really had a chance to use it, had to wait for a replacement hub), and probably some other bits I’ve forgotten about until they arrive.

    Unfortunately I won’t be able to use ‘room scale’ due to the lack of room (and low ceilings), hence the ODT (Cyberith) to squeeze out a bit more workable volume while minimising Vection issues.

    • Zizy
    • 4 years ago

    I set my eyes on Hololens, as I believe it is way better than all VR devices close to market. It at least enables the basic focusing on the different parts of the image which is the killer feature for me. Not going to buy devkit though, not enough good ideas what to make yet.
    Hopefully consumer version will be 500-ish when v1 gets released.

    Those VR devices resemble 3D screens way too much for my liking. I mean, what is the difference? Software that notices you moved your head so image changes slightly, plus ability to move around as these are head mounted. That’s all. Everything else can be had now using existing 3D screens and glasses with the same results (just grab passive 4K 3D TV)

      • Walkintarget
      • 4 years ago

      If I had to guess at the price, I guessed $700’ish, at the least. My 9 y.o., a Minecraft addict, loves the idea of the Hololens, but knowing how MS supports its hardware ( I still own an MS FF2 joystick) I imagine Hololens will be replaced within 2 years by Hololens 2 – Halo Edition, and leave early adopters high and dry.

        • Billstevens
        • 4 years ago

        Well the dev kit is going to be $3k and this thing is actually a full fledged windows computer so expect a final version to at least cost as much as a fancy laptop. It wont cost under $1k.

        Augmented reality will be great, and hololens tech looks very promising display tech. But right now I guarantee most of you would be grossly disappointed with it. Their marketing was brilliant but super misleading. Their demos imply their projections will fill your whole FOV, when really their current models only have a 30 degree FOV. Compare that to VR headsets which are 100-110. 30 degrees looks like a 15 inch monitor at 2 feet away according to Microsoft.

        So it will feel like you have a tiny floating screen in front of you… I want to see them at least get up to 100 degrees before this becomes compelling. 100 degree vert and horizontal pretty much fills your forward facing vision. That would look amazing with this tech especially because its integrating things into the real world so things right in front of you would look 100% natural since the rest of your vision would just be filled with the world around you.

          • Zizy
          • 4 years ago

          Devkits are always way more expensive than the final devices… well except for OR 😀
          This thingy ditches several components of Surface 3 (touchscreen being the most expensive one) and adds some additional ones (holoscreen as the most expensive one). I don’t expect price to be way different.

          As for hololens to be disappointment, I agree that FOV is quite small in the current iteration and you cannot do many of nice things because of this. Initial impression might not be as mindblowing, but initial impressions will be enough just to convince the first wave of customers, not to stay alive in the long term.

      • djayjp
      • 4 years ago

      Someone from microsoft working on hololens supposedly recently stated that it’s like looking at a 15″ monitor from 2 feet away, in terms of fov lol.

    • Klimax
    • 4 years ago

    Currently waiting. First new GPU then It’ll be seen.

    • Firestarter
    • 4 years ago

    I’m waiting for both the Rift and the Vive to be available and to try at least one. If it’s good enough, I’ll get one, a new GPU and a steering wheel/HOTAS

    • Grimmy
    • 4 years ago

    Option 7: I’ll wait for version 2 when everything gets better and hopefully cheaper.

    Specially the resolution and the graphics cards also have gotten better.
    But also controllers and there are more games and uses.
    Maybe less cables. And front camera is a requirement.
    Too bad that early adopters always gets a high price for gear that soon will be better and cheaper unless you backed the oculus kickstarter, then you got the DK1 & Retail for $300.

      • VincentHanna
      • 4 years ago

      Option 8: I’ll wait for version 4-5 when there is actually worthwhile content available, everything is cheaper, and they’ve started to combine things like cameras and remote controls (and possibly even a gen 5 console) together into a much smaller and more convenient package.

    • ronch
    • 4 years ago

    I think this VR ‘craze’ will be the next 3D TV craze. TV makers were running out of ideas on what to make everyone replace their perfectly useable TVs so they all pinned their hopes on 3D TVs. Did it catch on? I guess, for most folks, good enough is good enough.

      • Firestarter
      • 4 years ago

      I don’t care what’s good enough for most folks, I want what’s good enough for me

    • Convert
    • 4 years ago

    I have a 3D TV to sell you all.

    I will say this about current VR tech though; we are getting really close to having a adequate product offering.

      • Billstevens
      • 4 years ago

      I think first gen VR is very good but it will fall short for most people. The resolution is really low compared to what gamers are used to. Also the FOV is small enough to where you get the scuba mask effect.

      There is going to be a tipping point, hopefully in the near future, where FOV and resolution are high enough that pretty much everyone is going to be blown away. At that point VR games and experiences will be must haves.

      Gaming and movies in 2D will never die though, VR will just create new genres of games and entertainment.

    • jihadjoe
    • 4 years ago

    Where’s the Virtual Boy option?

    • adampk17
    • 4 years ago

    I had a Nintendo Power Glove as a kid. That lesson has stuck with me for almost 30 years.

    I’m firmly in the I’ll have to wait and see how this next wave goes camp before investing in it.

    • odizzido
    • 4 years ago

    I have interest, but at the price they’re going for I’d need to try it before deciding for sure. Also not set on any particular brand.

    Also no option between deciding on one and what I assume is no interest at all? If we were all the type to blindly purchase products I don’t think we would be on this site to vote in the first place.

      • DPete27
      • 4 years ago

      Seconded.

      • ronch
      • 4 years ago

      Thirded.

    • Deanjo
    • 4 years ago

    Until there is a good flight combat/driving sims that utilize it, I have zero interest.

      • Gyromancer
      • 4 years ago

      Project cars has VR support. So buy a rumble seat, wheel, and pedals and strap yourself in.

        • Deanjo
        • 4 years ago

        I’ve got Project Cars already, it is fine but as I mentioned below, the current gen of VR products still do not have that full FOV that would be desired where you can see things happening out of the corner of your eye.

          • Laykun
          • 4 years ago

          Have you actually tried a racing sim in a DK2?

            • Deanjo
            • 4 years ago

            A racing game, no, but I have tried the DK2 and the FOV issue is still there. You are still staring into a tube. The human eyes have a FOV of roughly 135 degrees vertical and 200 degrees of horizontal. The DK2 falls short of that.

            • Laykun
            • 4 years ago

            You’ll probably be dead by the time the device you want comes along.

            • Deanjo
            • 4 years ago

            Thus why I will probably never have VR at home (btw such VR sets have been out for years, just not in the public sector).

            Edit: Actually StarVR offers 210 degrees of horizontal 130 degrees of vertical [url<]http://www.starvr.com/[/url<]

            • Laykun
            • 4 years ago

            There’s some pretty good reasons why those sets aren’t available to the public, particularly if people thought $600 was a bit steep for a VR headset.

            • Deanjo
            • 4 years ago

            People were paying $1500 back around the turn of the century for VR headsets.

            If the product is good and lives up to the hype, then people will spend the money. My HOTAS setup costs well above the $600 price of the Oculas. Heck my peddles were a few hundred dollars more.

            • Laykun
            • 4 years ago

            Those 1500 dollar headsets, even the ones now, pale in comparison to the rift. The ones you’re talking about are much, much more expensive. Take it from someone who worked in a research department procuring a lot of these pieces of equipment.

            • Billstevens
            • 4 years ago

            Thats likely not true. FOV will improve. A lot of us think 1st gen VR is great, but there are also many like Deanjo that will be distracted by the low res and small FOV. They would likely be happier waiting a few generations and trying VR again.

            • Laykun
            • 4 years ago

            I think you missed the point of my exaggeration. Deanjo has unreal expectations, it won’t end with just fov and resolution.

      • Chrispy_
      • 4 years ago

      Actually EVE: Valkyrie looks amazing and I’ve been playing Elite:Dangerous on a DK2. The games are there already, it’s the hardware that’s not up to scratch yet.

        • Deanjo
        • 4 years ago

        I’m thinking more along the lines of Falcon, Flight Combat simulator, etc and not a space arcade/adventure.

          • JAMF
          • 4 years ago

          Zo maybe something like Arma3 with VR? Or DCS with the WW2 DLC that’s in development?

            • Deanjo
            • 4 years ago

            Even those seem a bit “simplistic” for my tastes. Just for example, Falcon 4’s “Getting started” guide is over 700 pages long and came in a bound ring binder. The other shortcoming with the current VR solutions is limited FOV. If I were to use a VR helmet with a flight combat sim, I want to have my vision FOV fully utilized (example, being able to see my wingman out of the corner of my eye flying slightly behind me and being able to see my instrumentation while still focusing on looking through my HUD).

            • psuedonymous
            • 4 years ago

            You’ll definitely want DCS then.

          • jmke
          • 4 years ago

          Microsoft FlightSim is supported with DK2
          [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCoM_bI7YDY[/url<] as is Prepar3D [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUx_CUWkZ1Q[/url<] those are not arcady.

        • Billstevens
        • 4 years ago

        Space sims in VR are amazing. ED in the DK2 is so much more intuitive. Being able to track your enemy in a tight dogfight by looking above you actually makes you play better. Cant wait for Eve Valk with CV1 in early April.

      • jmke
      • 4 years ago

      downvoted your comment because you are making uninformed remarks.

      driving sims have no issue with the FOV as the FOV is similar to that of what you get as if you have a racing helmet on.

      Drivings Sims with excellent VR today:
      – Project Cars [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFJijwIJKb0[/url<] + comment from PC developer for commitment to Rift on release [url<]https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/41tuou/project_cars_remaining_updates_timeline/[/url<] - Live for Speed [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y61z_e22WRM[/url<] - Dirt Rally [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-uKFiMQ27g[/url<] - Assetto Corsa [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pOtKfoHnSk[/url<] Flight Combat: - Elite Dangerous - EVE:Valkyrie and more is underway [url<]https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/wiki/compatible_games[/url<]

        • Deanjo
        • 4 years ago

        Ummm ya, you have no idea what you are talking about. The typical racing helmet allows for 190+ degrees of FOV, visors extend well past the corner of your eyes. The Occulas allows for 110 degrees of FOV and is a far cry from what actual helmut are capable of. HGU-68/P’s and other flight helmets for example allow full 210 degree FOV.

        As far as your fligh combat goes, again those are more arcade than actual sims.

          • Entroper
          • 4 years ago

          All I can do is recommend that you try a driving sim in VR. The FOV doesn’t feel limiting at all. Ask the guys trading in their triple-monitor setups for a DK2/CV1 Rift how they like it.

      • Andrew Lauritzen
      • 4 years ago

      Dirt Rally and Elite are both pretty good. Although I *really* want a new X-Wing game for VR.

    • NovusBogus
    • 4 years ago

    Tried various flavors at CES, still waiting for a compelling reason to get one.

    • MarkG509
    • 4 years ago

    I’m saving up for a HaloDeck.

    Last time I tried anything that tried to call itself VR, I got a headache and felt a bit seasick.

    • albundy
    • 4 years ago

    well, the polls speak for themselves. very few seem to care. seems more of a try it once and throw it in the closet. BUT (no pun intended), i think that this tech has crazy potential for pov pr0n and can be very lucrative, especially if it works in unison with other toys. there, i said it. it is what it is.

      • Airmantharp
      • 4 years ago

      Actually, there’s no ‘I’m interested but not ready to buy today’ option- kind of spoils it, cause that’s where I sit.

      • Den
      • 4 years ago

      I’m interested but voted for “I’m fine with meatspace, thanks” because its the closest thing to “interested but haven’t bought anything”.

    • Voldenuit
    • 4 years ago

    Poll needs options for non-rubes, I mean, non early adopters.

    Also, a dig at the higher than purported price would have been a nice jab.

    • kloreep
    • 4 years ago

    While I’m excited for VR, I just don’t see a headset being in the budget for a couple years given the Rift’s launch price. Ask me again in 2018.

    • Thresher
    • 4 years ago

    I think it’s DOA.

    The vendors are smart enough to know that gamers aren’t a big enough market to make money, but I just don’t see much of a place for it outside of that demographic. The cost will come down over time and computing hardware will get more powerful at lower cost. But it’s still a peripheral that isn’t necessary to the experience of using a computer. It will always be an additional cost, on top of a computer+monitor, notebook, or laptop. Since it will only be used part of the time, not all the time, it will always be a nice to have, but not need to have.

    The phone versions are interesting and if the market is going to take off, it will be through that route, not as a peripheral.

      • Airmantharp
      • 4 years ago

      Video cards are an additional cost. Gaming mice, decent headsets, gaming monitors all add to the cost delta.

      It isn’t DOA, but it’s also not mass-market ready.

      • Laykun
      • 4 years ago

      Technically a monitor is an additional cost, computers don’t require them to run, but they add an extra level of interactivity to the machine you’re using, which is what the Rift specifically does. With the proper software and a VR device there’s no need for a screen on a computer, so by that logic it could quite possibly make 2D monitors obsolete. Imagine having as many virtual monitors in 3D space as you’d like with a $600 piece of equipment, you’re literally replacing the need for thousands of dollars worth of screens whilst saving the computer power required to drive them by only rendering the ones in your vision.

      • K-L-Waster
      • 4 years ago

      You could make exactly the same argument about discrete GPUs — but that’s the segment that keeps NVidia a profitable company. (As for AMD, well, it isn’t the GPUs that are generating the lion’s share of the red ink…)

        • Billstevens
        • 4 years ago

        Pretty much, and discrete GPUs are still niche among computer owners. Just look at a steam survey and the prevalence of Intel integrated graphics. And no one would argue that discrete GPUs aren’t a major part of the game industry.

      • Kougar
      • 4 years ago

      Not enough market? The PR options for VR are tremendous, taking a tour of houses before buying, apartments before leasing, universities giving virtual guided tours online, practically anything where prospective out-of-state customers are concerned. I could see museums and art exhibits getting in on it selling virtual tours, particularly for major shows. Of course there’s also other events, watching sports games as if you’re running down the sideline with the players and being able to chose your own viewing angles would be a major hit. The money required for say, the NFL to buy into the hardware to create VR watching would be pocket change to them.

      As far as gaming, that would contribute as well. Gamers themselves support over $100 million annually in online game tournaments. DOTA 2 alone accounts for $56 million a year in various mostly/partially viewer-funded prize pools, and that number will be going up with four $3 million majors now getting added per year. [url<]http://www.esportsearnings.com/games[/url<]

      • Billstevens
      • 4 years ago

      Honestly the Pron industry alone is enough to push high end VR on PCs as a peripheral. But I also think it will be quite some time before we see flagship AAA games are being made exclusively for VR by every company.

      Fortunately with have Sony, Valve, Oculus and the major 3D engine companies dedicated to bringing out great games and VR experiences. These guys will carry VR through the early period until adoption reaches a point that compels other major game companies build VR exclusives.

    • bthylafh
    • 4 years ago

    I have no depth perception up close so I can’t.

      • Den
      • 4 years ago

      From what I’ve heard, the lenses bend the light such that it seems like it is far away. So its a problem for near sighted people.

        • Sigma0004
        • 4 years ago

        I guess it would depend on how the depth of field is programmed. If the tech and software is mature enough, it may be able to adapt how it projects an image to accommodate someone’s eyesight.

        It has more than a few optometrists interested for remediation therapies of conditions like amblyopia (lazy-eye) and strabismus (exotropia, cross-eyed, or wall-eye) stemming from certain defects in the eye muscles.
        [url<]http://qz.com/489048/an-entrepreneur-is-using-virtual-reality-headsets-to-try-to-cure-vision-disorders/[/url<] Personally, I'm interested-- but can't afford the $2K cost it would take to upgrade my system and buy the device. If you can't pump 90FPS to one of these devices, you're cruising for a migraine.

          • Den
          • 4 years ago

          “If you can’t pump 90FPS to one of these devices, you’re cruising for a migraine.”

          I can do 299 FPS just fine in TF2… which is what I mostly play. 😛

      • ImSpartacus
      • 4 years ago

      See, this is a good point.

      Very very few people have had the opportunity to demo high quality vr. Until then, adoption will severely limited or else a chunk the population finds out that they literally can’t utilize this new $500+ tech.

      • wingar
      • 4 years ago

      I don’t either. But this is actually a strength in VR, it gives me near-instant presence inside a DK2. If you haven’t tried VR already, just do it already, I assure you that you wont want to go back.

    • Billstevens
    • 4 years ago

    Where is the, waiting for my free kick-starter edition Oculus Rift.

      • Entroper
      • 4 years ago

      Hear, hear!

      Waiting for CV1 to ship so I can put my DK2 on the shelf next to my DK1.

      • CScottG
      • 4 years ago

      Or the even more obscure:

      “..waiting for my free kick-starter edition Oculus Rift when I opted-out of payment for the DK1.”

        • orik
        • 4 years ago

        omg, do you have a time machine

    • DragonDaddyBear
    • 4 years ago

    When I can afford it I will be interested.

    • sweatshopking
    • 4 years ago

    not enough gpu power existing to power it, early models will suck and are too expensive.
    maybe in 2-3 years, but not in the near future. i’m hesitant anyway, as the only thing that would make my wife more angry about me playing games is if i strapped into a machine. I MIGHT BE KILLED

      • MrJP
      • 4 years ago

      …and you’d never see her coming.

    • Symmetry
    • 4 years ago

    I haven’t ordered one yet but I’m keeping an eye on it. Really I’m interested in what sort of window management people develop for these things and I think there are lots of exciting possibilities for productivity there. Sort of excited about VR games but not that much.

    • DeadOfKnight
    • 4 years ago

    I don’t like this poll. This is assuming that everyone interested has already bought one.

    EDIT: Poll fixed with new option.

      • Billstevens
      • 4 years ago

      I would assume most people in this site are interested in good VR, and at the same time most aren’t ready to go drop $600 + on a device they have never tried. Also I understand people who think they may not be interested in games that VR will offer.

      It is still unclear what types of games, beyond driving and flight simulators, will work best and what kind of game genres will develop.

    • Gyromancer
    • 4 years ago

    I voted for the Vive because I felt bad for it, but I’ll have my hands (head?) on both the Oculus and Vive soon. I also have Cardboard, but it’s really just a tiny taste of what’s possible.

    • f0d
    • 4 years ago

    waiting for vive vs rift review to see what is better

    i never buy anything until i see a review of all options

      • Billstevens
      • 4 years ago

      Well the Vive is going to be a dev kit at first in April, so even then comparisons will have that caveat when comparing ergonomics.

      • halfline
      • 4 years ago

      Vive was winning the reviews before CES.

      After CES…
      [url<]http://vrdorado.com/article/2016-01-12-virtual-reality-at-ces-2016-industry-awards-and-top-picks[/url<]

        • Billstevens
        • 4 years ago

        The allure of the room scale demo is strong. Its not a flat win as a product, it has worse ergonomics and visuals and its a less complete product. But its is pushing the most advanced room scale tracking tech which will be useful for those with the room to enjoy it.

        People have seen the release rift for multiple tech shows now. Tech shows reward new innovative tech so the new Vive Pre dev kit is a clear choice for innovation.

        • JonnyFM
        • 4 years ago

        I know a few people who had tried and pre-ordered the Rift, then the moment they experienced the Vive they cancelled their Rift orders and pre-ordered the Vive. It was that compelling.

      • JonnyFM
      • 4 years ago

      My gut says that these are going to be such a personal experience that people should actually try themselves before buying.

    • Krogoth
    • 4 years ago

    Where’s the cheese option?

    I vote for Gorgonzola Cheese.

      • Redocbew
      • 4 years ago

      I vote cheesecake, but then I always vote cheesecake, and it would have to be real cheesecake, not VR cheesecake.

        • chuckula
        • 4 years ago

        The VR cheesecake is a VERISIMILITUDE!

      • Sargent Duck
      • 4 years ago

      A TR poll cannot be complete without a cheese option. I vote for Cheese as well.

      • Sheogorath
      • 4 years ago

      Cheese for everyone!

      • anotherengineer
      • 4 years ago

      Almost read Gorgonzola as gonorrhea.

      Time for some sleep I think.

        • Redocbew
        • 4 years ago

        I really don’t want to know why you’d associate cheese with that.

    • chuckula
    • 4 years ago

    Unless it can recreate the genuine 90s experience, I’m not in.

    [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ugn1ejC1Jc<]WE ARE. WE ARE VR.[/url<]

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This