Do we have a practical resolution comparison? I love VR, but the squinting at times and lack of fidelity at a distance really messes with me.
It's not even SDE, just feels like I need to double my glasses strength, when I don't.
Does it support SteamVR?
That depends on Valve, but I don't see why not. It'll use the same APIs, probably works already.
It is not up to Valve, I'm sure Valve would allow it. The issue is if Facebook wants their walled garden or not. I'm hearing rumblings and getting nervous.
So their some benefit to the consumer for not having moveable lenses and digital IPD?
It doesn't seem like that much of a leap in features, feels more like a Rift 1.5 than what I'd expect from a true successor.
You practically have double the pixels because of the res bump and LCD screen having all 3 subpixels instead of 2 subpixels in the pentile OLED display of the old Rift.
When I compare my Go to my Rift, there's a very noticeable difference in quality. The downside is that LCD has a bit less vibrant colors and black levels.
I feel like they are going for the low cost altenerative to what will be the next Vive. This is basically a spinoff of their mobile products which makes it cheaper to design and make. Facebook isn't that interested in the PC crowd.
Uh, are we back in 2014 all of a sudden?
Valve just wraps the freely available Oculus SDK with OpenVR. They maintain that whole system, not Oculus.
Additionally the OpenXR specification just released which should make all VR HMDs compatible with all stores that aim to support it (which is, so far, all of them).
Oh, please. You can't be serious.
but why tho. Even 90Hz is noticeably more choppy compared to 144.
I will miss the tracking ring being on the bottom. That had practical value to me by allowing me to relax my hand's grip, counting on the ring to catch around my extended fingers.
If y'all wanted to watch, I'll be doing that Space Junkies National thing in about 2 hours from now for the semi-finals and (if we win) the finals in 4 hours. Both'll be streamed on our Twitch. That's 8PM EST and 10PM EST.
Should be some good matches; we're up against real stiff competition in the semis and finals. It'll also be live-commentary'd by VAL VR and Ubisoft is looking to do some highlight clips after the matches.
https://www.twitch.tv/lucidvrcade
https://twitter.com/ValveNewsNetwor/status/1108510954520748034
The amount of people in the replies to this commenting on how they're just flat out not interested in the game unless it has a non-VR mode has me kinda worried, since that would mean making huge compromises and not utilizing VR to its full potential, which totally defeats the point.
Now, I'm aware that Valve is gonna have a new headset to sell and that they won't make compromises on that front because they want people in VR, and while I certainly understand the sentiment of wanting a game to come out for the hardware you have rather than the hardware you don't, I can't really sympathize with it because a lot of these replies come off as almost disdainful towards VR as a medium.
It's gonna be VR only and its going to actually flop. Not because its bad. Not because Valve lost their touch. Only because, literally no one has a VR headset still.
maybe they design for VR first and then port it to traditional displays, pulling a reverse skyrim.
What?
he means HLVR is not a killer app as people seem to hype about it.
it won't bring new users, nor will make existing one eager to buy the game.
I haven't really had a chance to try The Forest VR up until now, and I have to say I'm very impressed. In fact, it's pretty much immediately become one of my favorite and most memorable VR experiences.
There's something about the atmosphere of that game that sucks me in like very few other VR games truly do these days. The sound design helps a lot, and the last non-native VR title to have me reach this level of immersion was Subnautica. Both games are considered by the general community as too janky to bother with, and while it's definitely a very personal impression, I couldn't disagree more.
If you've played a decent amount of VR and can put up with jank, and you've played The Forest before (very important because the controls are just not intuitive at all), then the VR version should absolutely go on your must-play list. I started playing it just to check it out and ended up deep in an hours-long play session.
You might want to check out at The Solus Project too.
This is the game Turtle Rock studios has been working on, primarily for the Quest but also coming to Rift:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSmH7rStGbQ
But that's still wrong
More Carmack tweets. LCD screen on the Rift S is lower persistence than the OLED screens in the Rift and Quest:
https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1108703559263178752
Peo
I dunno, I'd love to play half life again in a really well developed VR conversion, and obviously this forum is going to be massively biased in that direction, but I honestly think in the whole scale of the gaming market enthusiasm for half-life is getting pretty close to rock bottom. Episode 2 was released over 11 years ago, and half-life 2 itself over 14 years ago. There's a massive portion of the gaming market that has no idea what half-life even is at this point, so while I do agree a really well made half life VR would probably sell well because of the high portion of headset owners being long-time pc gamers, I really don't think it's what's going to shift the general gaming population into VR
But I don't think it really matters what the franchise is; a polished VR game that looks fun is going to attract people regardless. Just look at Boneworks, sure it bears some resemblances to half-life but it's not affiliated to it in any way, yet it's still gained a massive following and hype in a short time simply due to it seeming like it's going to the the most well polished and complete VR game to date.
Not to mention, I'm not sure if the portion of the gaming market that doesn't know about half-life is really relevant when talking about VR, considering most people who have the money to own VR are 20-and-overs who would obviously know about it.
To be fair, that's true of any game.
People who were 5 years old when half-life 2 came out are 20 now, so they are absolutely relevant. The gaming market grew enormously after half-life became relatively obscure and although it's still fairly well known as a classic there's no denying that there's still a large portion of people that don't really know or care about it. It's hard to get solid statistics but it seems even among people who play other valve games there's a fair amount of people who don't own or play half-life 2.
It's a fair point that regardless of the game's history or how well people know it really well made games will help to sell VR (and I agree), I'm mostly just saying that I don't think half-life is really the massive franchise it used to be to the general public
is HL2 in VR that much of a deal anyway, other than a change in perspective? is it truly going to inmense players even more than they are, or its just another input method?.
because back when CoD was announced for the Wii it was overstated how inmersive it was going to be to use motion controls to aim and move, and yet it was not only a disgrace, but it absolutely added nothing of value.
VR can't be compared to the wii-s motion controls. At all.
maybe i worded it poorly? I'm sure thats not what i was talking about.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
