Enter the Metaverse.

[Dilip]

Finally after having lots of arguements that should there be a 2560x1440 rift or not.Most here are of the opinion that there is no sufficient processing power and its not time for such resolution and much more. OK, here comes a surprise from a UK based company ...

http://www.roadtovr.com/gameface-labs-f ... ay-mobile/

And now we officialy have working prototype of 2.5k in world. They did mentioned consumer vr begins at 2560x1440. They are also combining power of Snapdregon 800 / Tegra SoCs, for stand alone vr headset. A nice informative article and I am loving road to vr for such fast new feeds. Really a new vr era. Rift makers i am waiting.

[colocolo]

ha cool... then the entry level for the rift would be like 4k 130°FOV, not?

[Dilip]

Even at 110degree diagonal it will be great at 4k. The more fov the higher screen door.

[3trip]

ha cool... then the entry level for the rift would be like 4k 130°FOV, not?

The rift must be equal or higher to its competitors, (or significantly cheaper) to stay competitive.

[Mystify]

ha cool... then the entry level for the rift would be like 4k 130°FOV, not?

The rift must be equal or higher to its competitors, (or significantly cheaper) to stay competitive.

Considering that they are including graphics cards in the headset ... I think the rift will be much cheaper. And have a longer useable lifespan, as it is probably far easier (and cost effective, not all games will be VR) to upgrade your PC's card. I hope gameface is successful, but even if we assume it works exactly as advertised, there seems to be significant differences between them that will allow competition, even if their specs are wildly different.

edit: it also sound like those graphics card's aren't too impressive; they are mobile gpus. Additionally, it does not seem to have motion tracking, which is...problematic.

[Leahy]

Cool, but I think we're still a few years away from having enough processing power for 1440p at the speeds necessary on a mobile gpu. Even when we get there how long are the batteries going to last?

[Dilip]

Cool, but I think we're still a few years away from having enough processing power for 1440p at the speeds necessary on a mobile gpu. Even when we get there how long are the batteries going to last?

They are planning to include tegra k1 which is fastest SOC till date. They are woving android that does not mean not targeted to PC. What sort of processing you expect for candy crush vr at 1440 its possible even with tegra 4. Battery doesn't matter 8800Mah Li-ion power bank cost just 12 dollars in India. What power u need more than that.

[Mystify]

Fastest SOC doesn't tell you how a SOC compared to a gaming PC, nor how cost effective it is.

[colocolo]

mobile VR computing would need a paradigm shift in overall chip technology because of the huge power consumption. Won't be silicon, but perhaps photonic circuits or graphene. Still 15 years away but Samsung announced recently that they can now grow graphene on whole wafers.
http://phys.org/news/2014-04-breakthrou ... phene.html

"This is one of the most significant breakthroughs in graphene research in history," said the laboratory leaders at SAIT's Lab. "We expect this discovery to accelerate the commercialization of graphene, which could unlock the next era of consumer electronic technology."

[Dilip]

Fastest SOC doesn't tell you how a SOC compared to a gaming PC, nor how cost effective it is.

They have nowhere said they are planning any thing which will be mobile exclusive and you won't need PC at all. Its actually otherwise. This device will be self sufficient means casual vr games won't need PC yet you still can attach it to PC to play more intence games. It is like additional facility.you can Google few months back jhon carmack had same plan for future rift.

Its future. EVen rift Future versions bound to have SoC.

[Mystify]

Fastest SOC doesn't tell you how a SOC compared to a gaming PC, nor how cost effective it is.

They have nowhere said they are planning any thing which will be mobile exclusive and you won't need PC at all. Its actually otherwise. This device will be self sufficient means casual vr games won't need PC yet you still can attach it to PC to play more intence games. It is like additional facility.you can Google few months back jhon carmack had same plan for future rift.

Its future. EVen rift Future versions bound to have SoC.

Sure. Future versions, with future technology, could make it work, I am sure. I am not convinced it is sufficient now, and if I have to hook it up to a computer to do heavy duty games, then it has just turned into an extra cost and extra weight.
They aren't about to sit down and tell you all of the drawbacks to their system, they are going to present the benefits. Those benefits do come with drawbacks, which will mean it is not going to be the clear choice.

[Dilip]

Fastest SOC doesn't tell you how a SOC compared to a gaming PC, nor how cost effective it is.

They have nowhere said they are planning any thing which will be mobile exclusive and you won't need PC at all. Its actually otherwise. This device will be self sufficient means casual vr games won't need PC yet you still can attach it to PC to play more intence games. It is like additional facility.you can Google few months back jhon carmack had same plan for future rift.

Its future. EVen rift Future versions bound to have SoC.

Sure. Future versions, with future technology, could make it work, I am sure. I am not convinced it is sufficient now, and if I have to hook it up to a computer to do heavy duty games, then it has just turned into an extra cost and extra weight.
They aren't about to sit down and tell you all of the drawbacks to their system, they are going to present the benefits. Those benefits do come with drawbacks, which will mean it is not going to be the clear choice.

Yeah that really is point for those who are looking for PC only experience and want price to be bare bone
Still its giant leap in quality terms we need 2560x1440 at least from rift is my point

[Mystify]

I don't care if your resolution is so high I can't detect it, if there isn't head tracking its not going to work for me. I also don't care how high the resolution is, if you don't have enough processing power to utilize it fully, its going to waste. I also don't care how good the specs look, if it is so expensive that nobody gets it, there will be no content to utilize it.

Everyone always acts as if the resolution is the end-all and be-all of making a better headset. Its nice, but I think its far from the most important factor.

Also, everyone always says "[our resolution] is the minimum needed for a good VR experience."

[Dilip]

Resolution is key to get iimmersed if its less there will be looking through channel fensing effect. If you don't care resolution means you don't care immersion. What is point then to looking for vr at first place? Resolution is tightly and inverse way affecting display in proportion of FoV. You go large on for resolution look worst then what it would have on small FoV. Go below 90 Degree in FoV will break illusion of presence.Sony Morpheus is great example of sacrifice in FoV for resolution crispness. Now if rift to keep same FoV at least 2560x1440 is necessary for OK moderate low screendoor. Removal is may be at 8k resolution for current rift fov. So if they want 1080p final resolution they must bring for down to 90 degrees which kill rifts unique selling point.
Please do some Google and then post you don't care any thing.

[Mystify]

Resolution is key to get iimmersed if its less there will be looking through channel fensing effect. If you don't care resolution means you don't care immersion. What is point then to looking for vr at first place? Resolution is tightly and inverse way affecting display in proportion of FoV. You go large on for resolution look worst then what it would have on small FoV. Go below 90 Degree in FoV will break illusion of presence.Sony Morpheus is great example of sacrifice in FoV for resolution crispness. Now if rift to keep same FoV at least 2560x1440 is necessary for OK moderate low screendoor. Removal is may be at 8k resolution for current rift fov. So if they want 1080p final resolution they must bring for down to 90 degrees which kill rifts unique selling point.
Please do some Google and then post you don't care any thing.

I didn't say I didn't care. I said that other factors are more important, and sacrificing them in the name of resolution is a bad idea. We could take a 4k tv, strap some optics to it, and have a really high resolution that would be absolutely worthless.

[colocolo]

we need the res and FOV as high and as cheap as possible RIGHT NOW!
and we need another humongous 23 gen OLED fab....

[Dilip]

Yes largest Fov Highest dot per inch at lowest price with low persistence. Do you plan great robbery on display manufacturers couse its only possible via looting BTW I love ur spirit

[Dilip]

Resolution is key to get iimmersed if its less there will be looking through channel fensing effect. If you don't care resolution means you don't care immersion. What is point then to looking for vr at first place? Resolution is tightly and inverse way affecting display in proportion of FoV. You go large on for resolution look worst then what it would have on small FoV. Go below 90 Degree in FoV will break illusion of presence.Sony Morpheus is great example of sacrifice in FoV for resolution crispness. Now if rift to keep same FoV at least 2560x1440 is necessary for OK moderate low screendoor. Removal is may be at 8k resolution for current rift fov. So if they want 1080p final resolution they must bring for down to 90 degrees which kill rifts unique selling point.
Please do some Google and then post you don't care any thing.

I didn't say I didn't care. I said that other factors are more important, and sacrificing them in the name of resolution is a bad idea. We could take a 4k tv, strap some optics to it, and have a really high resolution that would be absolutely worthless.

Which factors you see being sacrificed in name of resolution? Isn't screen door limiting factor? Will you buy dk1 now and stick to it just beacouse it plays at low hardware requirements?

[Dilip]

I am not advocating road to vr link hardware as I also think they are opportunist who wants to encash rift wave. My point is rift if developing and pioneering vr at least got to make their first version as crisp and punchy as possible without getting too expensive or too heavy on hardware requirement. One way is reducing FoV like Sony which no one would welcome. Other increase resolution with trick in software calibration and optimisation such way that it does not prove too heavy on moderate gaming rig. So which way to choose is their decision. For other than gaming use like vr surfing and movie or even social high resolution is must.... There is no escape..

[Mystify]

Resolution is key to get iimmersed if its less there will be looking through channel fensing effect. If you don't care resolution means you don't care immersion. What is point then to looking for vr at first place? Resolution is tightly and inverse way affecting display in proportion of FoV. You go large on for resolution look worst then what it would have on small FoV. Go below 90 Degree in FoV will break illusion of presence.Sony Morpheus is great example of sacrifice in FoV for resolution crispness. Now if rift to keep same FoV at least 2560x1440 is necessary for OK moderate low screendoor. Removal is may be at 8k resolution for current rift fov. So if they want 1080p final resolution they must bring for down to 90 degrees which kill rifts unique selling point.
Please do some Google and then post you don't care any thing.

I didn't say I didn't care. I said that other factors are more important, and sacrificing them in the name of resolution is a bad idea. We could take a 4k tv, strap some optics to it, and have a really high resolution that would be absolutely worthless.

Which factors you see being sacrificed in name of resolution? Isn't screen door limiting factor? Will you buy dk1 now and stick to it just beacouse it plays at low hardware requirements?

For the rift, I don't see those sacrifices being made. They are including motion tracking, they are keeping it cheap and accessible, they are keeping it light, they are lowering the persistence, all while increasing the resolution. I found the DK1 to be very underwhelming due to the lack of motion tracking. The ability to lean around and look at things is probably the number 1 factor for immersion for me, and that addition is what got me to buy a DK2.
It is the hardware that was linked in the OP that I take issue with. It is cranking the resolution, claiming that it is the minimum resolution for good VR ( a claim I think I have seen for every VRHMD, regardless of what the spec is), incorporating inadequate, probably expensive hardware, seemingly skipping motion tracking...
They claim it is a huge step from the rift, but it is missing the things that make the DK2 worthwhile, instead pumping a screen resolution. More resolution is better... but it is not sufficient by itself. I would take a low-resolution screen with a filter with motion tracking over a perfectly crisp display without head tracking any day. One will feel like I forgot my glasses. The other will feel like I am in an imax dome.

[Libertine]

We could take a 4k tv, strap some optics to it, and have a really high resolution that would be absolutely worthless.

Thats exactly what im looking for. Using a 1080p 46" 3DTV for 3D with a high FOV and it is amazing. This renders 1080p x2 and its silky smooth when the framerate is above 40+. How much head turning are we going to be doing for long gaming sessions anyway?

I personally didn't see the 2560 discussion thread. I'd say anybody that didn't want a high res option now is insane.

[Mystify]

We could take a 4k tv, strap some optics to it, and have a really high resolution that would be absolutely worthless.

Thats exactly what im looking for. Using a 1080p 46" 3DTV for 3D with a high FOV and it is amazing. This renders 1080p x2 and its silky smooth when the framerate is above 40+. How much head turning are we going to be doing for long gaming sessions anyway?

I personally didn't see the 2560 discussion thread. I'd say anybody that didn't want a high res option now is insane.

I'm... I'm honestly not sure if you are joking or not.

[Libertine]

Maybe i misunderstood your meaning.

[Mystify]

You could put a 4 ft tv as the screen on your HMD, and get a really good resolution. However, the tradeoffs for doing this would far outweight the benefits.

[cybereality]

Please don't end up like this guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OHlaVNOKGM

[rupy]

... how do you delete posts?