Which HMD to buy?

[dislaire]

Hi, i'm sorry to disturb you all, i know this is very noob-like question but i'm currently planning on buying a HMD like, - really soon - and i need your advices guy

this is specially for cybereality, who worked on the driver Vireio perception

I'm hesitating between buying the sony hmz t2 and the occulus rift develloper edition.I know they are quite different, but what i want to know, is how will skyrim play on the occulus rift with your driver? in fact, i wanted initially to buy the sony hmz t2 because i can have it for 800 dollars and it's compatible with everything, but if skyrim plays really well on occulus rift i think it'll be enough for me to choose it instead because it's way cheaper and better on many things, specially on comfort, and many people complained that the hmz t2 has a specific sweet spot and that you need to work with the device to find it, and you need to move the device very often to bring back the sweet spot, and i don't really like that...

But i read every post on the vireio perception topic, and you said that things don't work with skyrim, specially shadows which are really bad...

what do you think i should do?

[cybereality]

If you are buying an HMD to play games on, then the Sony is probably your best bet. It will have support from Nvidia and also the DDD drivers, so you can play hundreds of games on it.

The Rift is great, don't get me wrong, but as an end-user it still not a finished product. Mainly this means that there is only 1 game currently working on it, Doom 3 : BFG. I know there is my driver, but that only adds support for a couple of games at this point. And the Skyrim support is not perfect (disabled shadows, etc.). There is also the VorpX driver, which should add support for a lot more. So there is hope, but it still can't compare to the kind of support DDD has.

The Sony can also play movies (Blu-Ray 3D, etc.) which will not work very well on the Rift.

I mean, if you want to be on the cutting-edge of the VR revolution, then by all means take a look at the Rift. But if what you want to do is just play some games in 3D with good compatibility, then you will probably be better off with the Sony.

[WiredEarp]

IMHO, if you are want a head mounted display for playing games, get the Sony. If you want a VR display, get the Rift.

The big difference is immersion. The Sony has a lower FOV, and a higher resolution, both of which make it better for playing games that require higher resolution (such as most realistic weapon shooters like BF3/Arma). The Rift has a lower resolution, but a higher FOV, which should make it more like 'being there', rather than just playing a game on a screen mounted in front of your head, like the Sony.

If you want to play most current games, the Sony is a better bet, since the Rift will only really be great on games designed for it, of which there are none besides Doom3 BFG Edition so far.

[dislaire]

okok, i don't watch movies, it will be only for gaming.So i guess i should take the HMZ (but it's soooo expensive lol).But i'm scared that it's too uncomfortable for the price it's sold.

Do one of you have the hmz? How is the comfort with it? do you really need to struggle to find the sweet spot? and is it worht the cost for you? i think it really is what i want for now, and i should wait for the consumer version of the occulus rift if i want it, but spending 800 bucks on a device that is uncomfortable ... I mean, i see everything on the internet, some says it's horrible, other says it's very comfortable, some says that it's very blurry on the edges, others say that it's crystal sharp,some says that the sweet spot is very hard to find and you need to constantly move the hmz and struggle in order to find it back (that's what scares me the most) and other says that it's really easy... i don't know what to belive anymore lol

At least, with occulus rift, none of these flaws are present, you just put the device on your head and it's done, no need to struggle.If the sony was very comfortable , with perfect image and no sweet spot searching, i would definitely go for it even for 1000$. But since i can't try it (no sony shop that let you try the device in my country) the only thing i can do is buy, and try when i'll have it, and i'm scared that i'll be disappointed if all these issues are true...

[Mystify]

That makes me think the HMZ is not properly calibrated for everyone, so some people are lucky and it works, it fits them properly, matches up with whatever features of their body are relevant etc, and it works, while other people mismatch and have problems. Just theorizing.

[mahler]

....., but spending 800 bucks on a device that is uncomfortable ...

You could find a retail shop where they have one on display.

But I've already seen multiple video's and blogs about modding it for comfort.

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... omfortable
Google: https://www.google.com/search?q=HMZ+mod+comfortable

I found this interesting product:

[youtube-hd]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpOhlfuEP1E[/youtube-hd]

Their website: http://www.blazin3d.com

I personally like this 'upgrade' for blocking light

[cybereality]

No doubt, the HMZ-T1 is uncomfortable to wear for more then 30-45 minutes at a time. I mean, it could be worse, but it could also be a lot better. There are 3rd party mods you can do that supposedly help. I haven't tried them. I also hear the HMZ-T2 is slightly more comfortable but still not perfect.

In terms of the sweet-spot, I didn't find it to be a problem. Now you do have to get it to sit right in front of your eyes. There is some minor adjustment you can do with the sliders. So I was able to get pretty much all of the screen in focus and looking good. Some people have different IPD, or bigger noses, facial structure, etc. so its not going to be perfect for everyone. But I could not complain about the picture quality.

Worst case you can sell it on ebay and only lose like $50-100. And its good to have tried, because all newer HMDs will inevitably be compared to the Sony.

Also, I see some going for around $600 on ebay, which is not bad and certainly more palpable then $800.

[WiredEarp]

There is no current consumer HMD that will fulfil your desires, currently the expectation cannot match the reality. I'm hoping that the Rift may break through this barrier, once there is sufficient software developed with the Rift in mind.

I've tried the HMZ in the store, its a nice product, I feel it would be uncomfortable however, so it would pretty much require mods before you could use it for long periods of gaming. Even in the shop it left a red mark on my head from the front pad. There are lots of decent looking mods out there however.

[dislaire]

okok i think i'll go for the sony hmz t2 - i was already planning on buying blazin3d custom pads - if anyone has tried them is it really better with blazin3d pads? how different than without?

really scared about comfort issue

[Kirito]

if you need a hmd for games wait a lil bit longer for the oculus rift dev kit because it is created for games
the hmd of sony is just to watch movies.

and there is a friend of me on school that bought a sony hmd and send it back because it was so bad he said

he sold it for 700$ and ordered 2 oculus rift dev kits instead

cheers

[dislaire]

i've purchased the sony hmz, i think it fits better what i want for now.Plus, i already have some difficulties to discern what's real and what's not so i really don't think the occulus rift is what i need right now

The HMZ isn't bad and is meant specially for games . It has very good optics, way better than the occulus, at first i thought it was overpriced (650 $ in japan, where i bought it) but i read it's optics are really really good, and that's why the device is so heavy and elongated because it zooms the images to make you feel that you're in a movie theater, not just look into tiny screens.

But the occulus isn't here for the image quality but more for the immersion so i don't think you can really compare the 2 products.each one do a really different job, Sony's one is more for the actual market (home cinema, TV) and Occulus Rift is more for a future market (virtual reality , not a cinema experience but realistic experience).Saying that the devellopper edition is better for gaming is a bit enthusiastic i think, games really need to be devellopped for it to be good because it really changes how you need to play (you don't aim the same way, you don't see the same way, you don't move the same way) and theres only one game like that right now as CyberReality said, Doom 3 BFG.I'm sure plenty will be in the future, just not now.If somebody wants a device to enjoy actual games, it's not the rift one should pick, the rift is for future games. But if SKyrim would have played really well on the rift, i think i would have buyed it instead of the hmz, even devellopper edition or nit, but it seems that it does not even though CyberReality really tried to make it good on it

I will wait for the consumer version and buy it later probably

THX everyone

@mahler : The second mod sure looks REALLY special lol, I'm sure my girlfriend will find that i'm really sexy with it

[WiredEarp]

@ dislaire:

It has very good optics, way better than the occulus, at first i thought it was overpriced (650 $ in japan, where i bought it) but i read it's optics are really really good, and that's why the device is so heavy and elongated because it zooms the images to make you feel that you're in a movie theater, not just look into tiny screens

They all have optics to zoom the images, there are no HMD's that you look directly into tiny screens that I'm aware of. Also, I don't think you really have any experience with Oculus optics, so saying the optics in the HMZ are way better makes you look a little foolish.

[dislaire]

hum. First, i tried the DIY occulus rift, so yes i know what i'm saying, and even though the devellopper has a wider screen with better fill factor and is better on almost every point , i'm sure that won't make a HUUGE difference (it really is not the point of the devellopper edition).Second, no, the occulus has no traditional "zoom optics" as i'm aware of , it's really different i think (well, it doesn't seem like it has something like that,it probably has something similar but i found that it was really different than every other hmd),i just know that it has a LCD panel with pre warped contents which simulates the human vision , and which makes you feel that you're in the game.third, carl zeiss cinemizer and a lot of ebay's hmd looks like you watch a tiny screen.Of course they probably all have "zoom optics" to zoom the image , but it's just not as good.

Plus the occulus isn't final at all for the moment, so it's perfectly normal that the optics of a finished product which cost the double (sony or not) like the hmd are way better.I didn't tell that the sony is a superior product , i just said it's more of a finished product than the occulus rift , and it's normal since the occulus rift isn't finished.the two products really do not provide the same experience, and i'm sure the hmz will be outdated (very) soon, i mean, it's only an impressive big tv

it's you who looks foolish right now for me , and i'm not here to be mean to other people, so if your ego is hurt because i said the hmz has better optics than the non final occulus rift (humans ), well, i'm sorry for you,and don't feel like you need to respond because i won't continue this discussion.I just was wondering at first, cyberreality answered me what i wanted to know, and i figured i should leave some feedback about my experience.

[WiredEarp]

Which DIY Rift did you get to try?

You basically don't know anything about the Rifts optics, yet you seem to feel you can talk about it with some sort of certainty.
All those HMD's you mentioned use lenses to magnify the image. The only difference is the FOV.
The HMZ is definitely a more polished product, apart from its ergonomics - but its not really VR, its just a HMD IMHO.

My ego isn't hurt at all, I have no stake in Oculus (well, besides the Rifts i've ordered) - but if you want to talk about which product is better in a comparison, it helps to not say stuff that makes you sound as though you dont know what you are talking about, such as

because it zooms the images to make you feel that you're in a movie theater, not just look into tiny screens.

If you had some of your own research, you'd realise that the Rift has:

a) optics
b) a wider FOV than the HMZ - so it would be the HMZ which would have a tinier apparent screen to look at.

I dont think there is a single HMD that does not use optics or mirrors to magnify the image - I dont see any way to focus otherwise on the screen.

[Diorama]

third, carl zeiss cinemizer and a lot of ebay's hmd looks like you watch a tiny screen.Of course they probably all have "zoom optics" to zoom the image , but it's just not as good.

It's true, Carl Zeiss are famous for their cheap, low quality optics.