CES 2014 Oculus Rift

Post by **3trip** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:33 pm

It wouldn't be too hard for Occlus to put a few of those position indicators on the back strap for 360 tracking. Not to mention a camera with a wider field of view would easily let you stand.

Occulus could just be just low balling the crowd so they can impress them with how much they "improved" the rift next time.

Post by **blazespinnaker** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 5:05 pm

MSat wrote:We're not reacting to the fact that you're upset about the lack of 360 degree motion tracking support in the Crystal Cove prototype, but by your accusations that the reason for this is due to some secret plot by Brendan Iribe to undermine future competitor Virtuix. Your tinfoil is showing.

OK fair point. Then let me rephrase this, they are HUGELY BEYOND FREAKING INSENSITIVE TO THEIR CHANNEL PARTNERS. Is that better?

How do you come out with a solution at the same time the omni is trying to show off at the same CES using the Oculus Rift as their primary HMD and then tell everyone "oh we're optimizing for a sit down experience" and include features which won't work with those guys.

So if they're not doing it on purpose, they're being *total* insensitive and frankly LAME jerks here.

And sure, perhaps they will come out with a full 360 solution .. but christ, they could at least be throwing the stand up crowd a bone here at CES rather than saying what they're saying.

They could at least say that the HMD will be compatible with the Stem system if they can't provide a full 360 solution - or something.

I'm sorry, the tactics (or lack of) seem overwhelmingly jerky to me.

Post by **MSat** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 5:30 pm

blazespinnaker wrote:
They could at least say that the HMD will be compatible with the Stem system if they can't provide a full 360 solution - or something.

It's up to developers to support whatever hardware they wish. Should Oculus be doing everyone else's work?

Post by **blazespinnaker** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 5:34 pm

MSat wrote:
blazespinnaker wrote:
They could at least say that the HMD will be compatible with the Stem system if they can't provide a full 360 solution - or something.

It's up to developers to support whatever hardware they wish. Should Oculus be doing everyone else's work?

It's an ecosystem .. OVR is acting like some kind of arrogant "we are so amazing we don't have to play nice" company.

Post by **MSat** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 6:14 pm

blazespinnaker wrote:
MSat wrote:
blazespinnaker wrote:
They could at least say that the HMD will be compatible with the Stem system if they can't provide a full 360 solution - or something.

It's up to developers to support whatever hardware they wish. Should Oculus be doing everyone else's work?
It's an ecosystem .. OVR is acting like some kind of arrogant "we are so amazing we don't have to play nice" company.

Ok, so they should do everyone else's work for them.. Got it. Hey, while they're at it, perhaps they can just give away Rifts for free too!

Post by **GeraldT** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 6:19 pm

It's not an ecosystem ... it's a company trying to build one and other companies trying to ride the wave and building their own niches.

Oculus decided that their best chances to establish their ecosystem is to focus on seated VR. A very wise move I guess. Just because in your head you have a simple solution that they should employ does not mean it is that simple; they have to balance wear and tear, manufacturing costs etc. to hit that sweet spot with their price and the agerave users need with their performance.

And it's not as if they focus on telling everyone how they focus on seated VR ... some people asked and they gave the honest answers. And NOBODY said that it won't be possible to use the Rift with the Omni as long as you can live with DK1 level tracking or that they might offer extended tracking solutions once the first product introduction is behind them.

So far Oculus has been rather agressive trying out all possible/sensible solutions and picking the ones that offer the best tradeoffs.

And there are other tracking solutions out there and Virtuix is also capable of building a tracking solution for their usecase.

Stop whining, start developing solutions if this is so dear and near to your heart.

Reddit · Post by **nateight** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 6:33 pm

blazespinnaker wrote:FREAKING INSENSITIVE...arrogant...LAME jerks

Blaze, look in a mirror. 360° operation of an HMD is a monumental and totally unsolved problem in the consumer space. Even DARPA has trouble tackling this, and they have hundred-thousand-dollar ODTs to bring to bear on the problem. Listen to yourself - you are literally saying Oculus has a magical solution to the issues of cable tangles and 360° head tracking and they are deliberately withholding these amazing innovations simply to undermine a "competitor" to their super-secret ODT division. No, Blaze, consumers will not and cannot be expected to install ceiling-mounted gimbals. No, Blaze, multiple cameras outside the HMD are not practical. No, Blaze, the software to enable bulletproof tracking based on internal cameras does not exist even in the academic realm. You've having a meltdown here, Blaze. Calm down, walk back into the light, and stop lashing out at everyone in sight. The alternative is being labeled a pariah by everyone who doesn't agree with your assertions. Regardless of what you may think, you don't have many if any allies in this fight, and that fact does not make your misguided cause a noble one.

Oculus has always maintained that the consumer Rift will "target" seated use. It has to - the problems inherent in making a 360° HMD are too challenging for a first-generation device, and we'll be lucky if the tech evolves to the point where they can even make an attempt at 360° with the Rift's successor. Jan and Virtuix decided they wanted to build something to enable standing use despite knowing this, and Oculus let them do it. Presumably, when Oculus saw how the Omni raised over a million bucks on Kickstarter, Palmer's greed got the better of him, and he resolved to create his own ODT and crush these upstarts who effectively created the consumer ODT market, pulling the rug out from under Virtuix by releasing a deliberately crippled Rift? If you actually believe this, please seek psychological counseling, because you have lost touch with reality. You are a danger to yourself and others. Stop this. Get help.

Post by **blazespinnaker** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 7:23 pm

It's not an ecosystem ... it's a company trying to build one and other companies trying to ride the wave and building their own niches.

It's NOT AN ECOSYSTEM?

REALLY?

So, Sixense is just a company trying to ride the wave? Virtuix is just a company trying to ride the wave? PrioVR is just a company trying to ride the wave?

Incredible.

Post by **GeraldT** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 7:38 pm

of course they are - Sixsense has been trying to establish the Hydra for a long time and there was very little interest. Then VR comes back and suddenly people care (at least some ... my guess is they ride the wave but still don't make it to the shore for a long time).
Other have technologies that suddenly become interesting to much broader audience ... and of course they try to establish their position with the Rift.

And now I stop feeding you.

Post by **blazespinnaker** » Sat Jan 11, 2014 7:45 pm

It's that kind of attitude that begs for a Sony or MSFT to come out with a HMD and put OVR in its place.

Post by **colocolo** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 6:02 am

Hmm.....perhaps it's a thing that Valve will do better.

I don't know what Oculus VR intends to do with that seated VR experience but people are anyway going to stand up and some scum is going to sue them anyway if they fall over due to their own silly fault.( we are hearing crazy things about american law here in europe)

To do this proper Oculus VR would have to sell also a chair with safety belts that needs to be connected to the Rift in order to unlock it.
It is a bit silly to go without 360° only because of this scum.
I don't know either if missing 360° pos tracking is a good argument for OculusVR in case of being sued.

Post by **Falan** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 8:01 am

I think blazespinnaker is just disappointed about the lack of immediate 360 support, as are we all im sure.

Personally although disappointed we don't get the holodeck in version 1.0 im delighted with what I saw at CES. OMFG!!!!!! AMAZED might be a better way of putting it!!!

I cant believe how totally amazing VR is looking now, in just a few years! If Oculus have cracked the main issues of latency/sickness and already have a working solution (however archaic it may look) to positional tracking, even seated for now, its just too good to be true. The mere thought of Mr Carmack even developing software for the consumer release is just trembling to consider.

Ok I did want to see 180 degree FOV, full body-tracking, blowback gun peripheral BF5 demo at CES im lying but Im still so happy for the progress being steadily made by such a new company. I just tried out a demo called RedFrame and it brought all that feeling back about how great VR will be in games with the consumer rift

Post by **Attreyu** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 8:18 am

Falan wrote:I think blazespinnaker is just disappointed about the lack of immediate 360 support, as are we all im sure.

Personally although disappointed we don't get the holodeck in version 1.0 im delighted with what I saw at CES. OMFG!!!!!! AMAZED might be a better way of putting it!!!

I cant believe how totally amazing VR is looking now, in just a few years! If Oculus have cracked the main issues of latency/sickness and already have a working solution (however archaic it may look) to positional tracking, even seated for now, its just too good to be true. The mere thought of Mr Carmack even developing software for the consumer release is just trembling to consider.

Ok I did want to see 180 degree FOV, full body-tracking, blowback gun peripheral BF5 demo at CES im lying but Im still so happy for the progress being steadily made by such a new company. I just tried out a demo called RedFrame and it brought all that feeling back about how great VR will be in games with the consumer rift

You are aware that we already have seated positional tracking, right ? OpenTrack, TrackIR, etc. Some of them are entirely free, you only need a webcam. For others you only need to print a marker and stick it on your Rift or Vrase, Durovis, etc.

The main problem is that there are not enough AAA games to implement it. Like you don't have nearly enough games with integrated SBS.

Post by **GeraldT** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 10:20 am

Attreyu wrote: The main problem is that there are not enough AAA games to implement it. Like you don't have nearly enough games with integrated SBS.

here we are touching a much more interesting topic for discussion I think. We all know how many problems there are when adding Rift support to existing games, like stereoscoping rendering issues or reflections that break when you tilt your head. And of course we are likely to see areas in some games that were never meant to be seen by players - imagine what you will see when you look up or behind you in StarCraft.

And all those with a static position camera - what will we see with a moving camera? I guess everyone here knows the issue where the camera moves through a model in the gameworld and you suddenly see "outside" of the level or the inside of a model. With positional tracking there won't be a physical limitation to stop you from putting your head under the skirt of that female elf in WoW. And when you stand up with full tracking your head might leave the racing car you are driving even though there was no window in the roof. Hell you might even be able to literally stick your head into the ground.

What solutions to these problems will we see? From the interviews I heard that they desaturate the image when the tracking looses contact and it switches back to the old tracking model. I guess the same could be done for cameras that enter 3D models ... but is that a good solution.
I really would like to get some "best practice" guide for that ... and I am glad that the guys from Oculus are there now to work on solutions that work. I think it was Palmer that said in one of the interviews that there are plenty of studios integrating the Rift into existing titles, so I expect there will be a lot of interesting solutions soon.

Post by **blazespinnaker** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:55 am

nateight wrote: <where nateight proves his inability to read and debate by resorting to ad hominems>

The simple fact, is that everyone wants to hear only one thing here - how great OVR is and how awesome every tiny thing they do is.\

They do a lot of awesome things. The rift is awesome. Low persistence of vision is brilliant. Low latency head tracking is very cool. Even a great sit down experience is a very very good idea.

But does that mean everything they do is pure gold? **** no. Why is it that I can't call down some of the things they do as being LAME?

Is this a religion or something? No, it's a 85M+ VC backed company who's rapidly becoming 'the man' rather than the crowd sourced / open source movement they started out as.

Post by **Alejux** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 12:57 pm

blazespinnaker wrote:
nateight wrote: <where nateight proves his inability to read and debate by resorting to ad hominems>
The simple fact, is that everyone wants to hear only one thing here - how great OVR is and how awesome every tiny thing they do is.\

They do a lot of awesome things. The rift is awesome. Low persistence of vision is brilliant. Low latency head tracking is very cool. Even a great sit down experience is a very very good idea.

But does that mean everything they do is pure gold? **** no. Why is it that I can't call down some of the things they do as being LAME?

Is this a religion or something? No, it's a 85M+ VC backed company who's rapidly becoming 'the man' rather than the crowd sourced / open source movement they started out as.

Did you forget, somewhere down the line, that OVR is trying to release a consumer VR HMD for about $300 this year? When did they ever promise to solve all problems VR related, for everyone else and deliver us the Holodeck?

Things will get in it's place, in due time. Better solution for tracking will come. Hand Tracking will come. Higher resolutions will come. Facial/eye tracking will come. And so on...
But these are all hard problems, that can't be solved by a couple of dozen engineers, in 1 year. All your rants about how Oculus will fail, how they are lame and how they are trying to bury Virtuix and so on, just makes it seem like you're giving a tantrum. Be careful before people start to think that your avatar is actually your picture.

Post by **colocolo** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 3:04 pm

It's a bit true.
If you do a little critic the mob is quickly raising against you with the pitchforks.
They are talking about things you were never complaining about(holodeck), it gets unobjective.
Positional tracking was always a feature that was on their list on the top. Though they didn't mentioned 240° tracking.
I am not demanding anything here. Just discussing it! Raising attention.
Thinking twice about a thing isn't bad at all.
Nevertheless i am pretty confident that OVR hasn't made a decision yet and is considering things also different for a release.
Don't underestimate the group that would want to play VR standing. (what about the Wiii?)
It would be a pretty big flaw for a so genious and marvellous low-persistence CV1.

Post by **MSat** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 3:55 pm

Can someone remind me how even unlimited motion tracking would be useful when an HMD isn't wireless? There's that physical limitation that prevents 360 degree head tracking from even being practical.

I'm still waiting for blazespinnaker to create the ideal VR product instead of him constantly complaining about Oculus and how Brendan Iribe is evil.

Post by **colocolo** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 4:08 pm

MSat wrote:Can someone remind me how even unlimited motion tracking would be useful when an HMD isn't wireless? There's that physical limitation that prevents 360 degree head tracking from even being practical.

I'm still waiting for blazespinnaker to create the ideal VR product instead of him constantly complaining about Oculus and how Brendan Iribe is evil.

there exist a few ultra-thin HDMI cables you can buy...Hung up on a hook fixed to the ceiling.
Like 2,6mm OD. My mouse cable is 0.2mm thicker and i can twist it like 20 times. It only needs to be a bit longer than necessary. I dont know how the wiring will be with CV1 but it would be practical if you could change them.
Also, turning right or left is always more or less balanced unless you don't begin to walk in circles or climb a spiral stair case ( in that case you could use the joystick).

Post by **blazespinnaker** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 4:40 pm

Yes, what he said. This is precisely what I do to great success.

Post by **MSat** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 4:44 pm

Which is something 99.99% or more users wouldn't do.

Post by **colocolo** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 4:52 pm

MSat wrote:Which is something 99.99% or more users wouldn't do.

I am not so sure about that. Average Joe is perhaps lazy and dumb, but not incapable to begin to be creative,
especially when amazed by VR. Its not like 99.99% need a handyman to hang up a painting or install a light bulb.

Post by **android78** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 5:03 pm

Just my 2c worth, but I don't see Oculus demonstrating a sit down optimized solution as a snub against any stand up solution or potential future competition. To me the demo makes sense since having the lateral tracking as well as rotational will significantly reduce the motion sickness. Between this and the improved screen response, it appears that they are well on their way to reducing motion sickness and allowing for extended play.
One other thing is that I would be surprised if they ever rely only on the optical tracking solution since at 60 hz, this would still be almost 17ms latency just for tracking. The likely solution will be a combination of high speed mems (gyro/accel/magneto) tracking and optical. I would even guess that the optical tracking (if included in the final product) would be an optional add on, with the standard package just relying on the mems devices similar to the devkit Rift.
I could be wrong, but I don't see any reason to start to panic that the friendly 3D crowd is being torn apart by commercial sense just yet. I can't wait to see the next step in the evolution.

Post by **JotaEme** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 6:29 pm

cybereality wrote:MTBS is still alive, but maybe not as happening as after initial "rift rush".

C'mon, this is more than "still alive".
Look at me! a new user

Post by **blazespinnaker** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 9:52 pm

android78 wrote:Just my 2c worth, but I don't see Oculus demonstrating a sit down optimized solution as a snub against any stand up solution or potential future competition.

The issue wasn't so much the demo, but rather the reddit video with Palmer and Nate talking about optimizing for sit down and going on about liability for stand up and not mentioning any kind of support for other solutions, like STEM.

If they can't/won't support standup & 360, why can't they just say that they'll try to be compatible with those that are willing to support it?

Post by **MSat** » Sun Jan 12, 2014 9:55 pm

Again, it's up to developers to support STEM in their software, not Oculus.

Post by **yuriythebest** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 12:55 am

New vid from RoadToVR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YoUV7uty40

Post by **TheHolyChicken** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 3:07 am

blazespinnaker wrote:The issue wasn't so much the demo, but rather the reddit video with Palmer and Nate talking about optimizing for sit down and going on about liability for stand up and not mentioning any kind of support for other solutions, like STEM.

If they can't/won't support standup & 360, why can't they just say that they'll try to be compatible with those that are willing to support it?

Because it'd be a lie. I get the strong impression they are a little more genuine than that. They'd like to be compatible, sure, but achieving that goal is different from wanting to achieve it.

Trying to cater for standing up introduces other problems; people falling over, people wandering out of range of computer and tearing components off their desks, cables diminishing experience, cable wear and tear, complications with tracking..... they've clearly decided that concentrating on nailing a sit-down experience is the most sensible and realistic goal for them right now. Managing the company's maiden product launch, into a virgin consumer market - making it affordable, reliable, and high-performance is already a huge enough challenge.

I'm also personally disappointed that there may be issues for tracking a standing person; I much prefer to play standing up myself where possible, and turning with my body instead of an analogue stick or mouse. I'm sure there are others here in the same boat. However, I also appreciate that sometimes compromises have to be made.

People jumped on you because you're calling Oculus jerks for not managing to provide a flawless product that satisfies absolutely everyone's desires. And then suggesting that they are sabotaging their own product's capabilities so that they can depress Virtuix, because they feel threatened by them as future competitors? REALLY? You're so far outside the realms of plausibility that people are laughing or dismissing you as a troll. It's time to pause and take stock of the situation, blaze.

Reddit · Post by **nateight** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 3:12 am

yuriythebest wrote:New vid from RoadToVR!

Hey, get the hell out of here with actual CES-related news! This is the (latest) thread for pontificating about how Oculus is actually evil/"lame" and willfully destroying Virtuix!

blazespinnaker wrote:But does that mean everything they do is pure gold? **** no. Why is it that I can't call down some of the things they do as being LAME?

I'm not attempting to squelch debate here, Blaze. The Rift not officially addressing a significant use case is disappointing to those who prefer standing to sitting, and I wouldn't have said anything if that was your primary complaint. I'm not even going to object to your tone - a lot of people probably consider me abrasive and overly snarky, and dismiss my opinions on those grounds alone. What bothers me is the conspiracy theorizing and borderline libel. Speculating that Oculus is "trying to depress sales of Virtuix Omni" and insisting they're "becoming 'the man'" despite being open and honest to a relatively incredible degree isn't you postulating a substantive argument, it's you having a hissy fit at best, and actively attempting to damage their reputation at worst, and all with zero proof. You're abusing the easy-going nature of the admins here with such shenanigans. I'm happy to debate the subject, but let's park the hysterical rhetoric and try to actually learn something, shall we?

Palmertech, Dec 04, 2012 (predating the pre-Kickstarter Omni thread by over two months):

Palmertech wrote:I agree that having connectors on either side is not optimal for mobile usage, but I made the call to make something that worked best for the average seated user.

Because we apparently seem to have wildly differing ideas about what constitutes a genuine debate, here's your chance to beat me even according to my own whimsical definition: Where's your equivalent quote, press release, or offhand comment implying that delivering a product catering to standers and backtoppers was ever the plan? Sure, it's an ecosystem - and Oculus is a business, not an ecologist. Their goal is and has always been to deliver the best possible HMD, and (despite all those morally corrupting piles of venture capital) that means the first generation picks only the low-hanging fruit of seated use, period. If Jan wants to prove more is possible, Oculus could have very easily refused to allow any official association with the Rift; the Oculus brass allowed this not because there was a chance Jan's prototype might widen the Rift's mind share (and Virtuix could be easily destroyed if and when Oculus suddenly decided to corner the dorky-looking slidemill market), but because the decision makers at Oculus are fundamentally decent people. But please: Reveal to the world the details of the agreement Oculus made to fully support and promote the Omni - I'll eat my words with a side of crow. Show me where Palmer said we should all expect to be able to use 100% of the Rift's eventual features from a standing position - such a statement would shake my well-earned confidence in him. Explain to all of us how the magical consumer-friendly 360º tracking solution you envision works - with Oculus not releasing it for nefarious business reasons, I think we'd all be very eager to buy one from you!

While we're at it, here's a STEM-related gem from Reddit you're sure to love, Blaze:

Prominence19 wrote:Why won't Oculus just add a module for the STEM tracker? I assume that would work just as good, if not better for positional tracking with the added benefit of not having a camera pointed at you.

palmerluckey wrote:Because our system is many times more accurate.

Are we done here?

Post by **mattyeatsmatts** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 3:33 am

blazespinnaker wrote:If there is no 360 degree head tracking, there might as well be no head tracking.

It's just a half assed solution. I can't imagine for a moment they'd think that's acceptable.

Isn't the whole point of the rift that you can look behind yourself?

It looks like a pretty decent upgrade, but to do something that lame would just be unbelievable.

[youtube]www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0[/youtube]

Post by **remosito** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 10:18 am

colocolo wrote:
MSat wrote:Can someone remind me how even unlimited motion tracking would be useful when an HMD isn't wireless? There's that physical limitation that prevents 360 degree head tracking from even being practical.

I'm still waiting for blazespinnaker to create the ideal VR product instead of him constantly complaining about Oculus and how Brendan Iribe is evil.
there exist a few ultra-thin HDMI cables you can buy...Hung up on a hook fixed to the ceiling.
Like 2,6mm OD. My mouse cable is 0.2mm thicker and i can twist it like 20 times. It only needs to be a bit longer than necessary. I dont know how the wiring will be with CV1 but it would be practical if you could change them.
Also, turning right or left is always more or less balanced unless you don't begin to walk in circles or climb a spiral stair case ( in that case you could use the joystick).

Which is how I will do it! Ceiling mounted.

But that's for the HC crowd. Not for joe average-early-adopter.

Rest not directed at you, but blazespinner:

Oculus has ALWAYS said they are targetting the mass market. Aiming for rock solid low price solution! To reach the critical mass to both have widespread software adoption and be able to drive display tech to 1000+ppi.

They never said once afaik they are trying to make the perfect VR nut wet dream solution for a lot of money that requires extensive setup and is finnicky. You want the perfect VR solution. Either wait or buy a STEM or prioVR system to allow you to do 360 degree/walk around VR

Post by **TheHolyChicken** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 10:54 am

From the horse's mouth (skip to 13 mins 21s):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfGuwlhx ... e&t=13m21s

Post by **colocolo** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:22 am

But what if Oculus VR would insert a simple metal hook in the product box and a simple sketch how to nail/screw it at the ceiling.

Brilliant! and ultra-thin cable/s.
Don't take that constructive critic here to serious everyone, i would consider 360° pos tracking (only for standing, not for walking around) for now as a nice free addition.

Surprise me with a hook OVR! (not meant sarcastic)

Post by **Kazioo** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:40 am

Another product from CES 2014:

Android based (Tegra 4), wireless VR headset with 1080p AMOLED display: GameFace Mark IV.

http://www.engadget.com/2014/01/13/game ... -ces-2014/
http://gamefacelabs.com/

Retail availability planned by the end of this calendar year.

Post by **blazespinnaker** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 1:34 pm

Rest not directed at you, but blazespinner:

Oculus has ALWAYS said they are targetting the mass market. Aiming for rock solid low price solution! To reach the critical mass to both have widespread software adoption and be able to drive display tech to 1000+ppi.

They never said once afaik they are trying to make the perfect VR nut wet dream solution for a lot of money that requires extensive setup and is finnicky. You want the perfect VR solution. Either wait or buy a STEM or prioVR system to allow you to do 360 degree/walk around VR

I am OK with buying a stem system, but why can't OVR talk about what they're doing to support 3rd party head tracking if they're not going to support it fully themselves?

Post by **MSat** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 1:44 pm

blazespinnaker wrote:...why can't OVR talk about what they're doing to support 3rd party head tracking if they're not going to support it themselves?

This doesn't even make sense.

Post by **blazespinnaker** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 1:48 pm

MSat wrote:
blazespinnaker wrote:...why can't OVR talk about what they're doing to support 3rd party head tracking if they're not going to support it themselves?
This doesn't even make sense.

It makes sense to anyone who wants to buy a Rift and use it with the STEM or PriorVR to support 360 degree head tracking.

Post by **lossofmercy** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:18 pm

Oculus is spearheading the VR movement, all of these other companies are feeding off of their success. If I was in Oculus, I would try to provide something that's as complete as possible and not have the customer worry about this or that peripherial. This is essential when you are trying to promote the device as a platform, not just the hardware. Plus there is so much research that needs to be done and they seem to have solved so many issues that they themselves aren't quite sure how many things they can solve by the release of the CK1. What if they have position tracking for the shoulder/neck as well by the time they start developing for CK1?

Additionally, Valve is already creating VR standards which should allow for easier integration for VR systems. What VR needs is good standards to follow, Oculus does not need to support any other system/company.

Post by **MSat** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:19 pm

edit: meh. pointless.

Post by **remosito** » Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:56 pm

blazespinnaker wrote:
Rest not directed at you, but blazespinner:

Oculus has ALWAYS said they are targetting the mass market. Aiming for rock solid low price solution! To reach the critical mass to both have widespread software adoption and be able to drive display tech to 1000+ppi.

They never said once afaik they are trying to make the perfect VR nut wet dream solution for a lot of money that requires extensive setup and is finnicky. You want the perfect VR solution. Either wait or buy a STEM or prioVR system to allow you to do 360 degree/walk around VR
I am OK with buying a stem system, but why can't OVR talk about what they're doing to support 3rd party head tracking if they're not going to support it fully themselves?

Because neither system is out. Neither systems has finnished SDKs afaik or nailed data rates and formats and given hard numbers on key aspects. By neither system I mean STEM,prioVR AND Oculus.

Hard to say how and if you will catch all three balls when all are still flying rather eratically! Sensor fusion isn't exactly rocket science, but it is ambit more than 1+1=2.

The real question to me is:
Why on earth are you taking from them not explicitly stating sth about other systems at CES where they are showcasing a MAJOR milestones of theirs. Have very little time per interviewer and a TRUCKLOAD of new stuff to talk about and explain and answer.

and jump to "they are the evil incorporate and want to screw over everybody else"?