Oculus Rift Review
- Thread starter djkav
- Start date
This sums up my thoughts exactly. The concept of VR is astounding but the screen tech is not good enough for my needs yet.
For now I will wait to see what the next gen VR headsets bring to the table.
- Extreme low res
- IQ problems
- Expensive given the above issues.
For now I will wait to see what the next gen VR headsets bring to the table.
Have you tried any headsets yet?
I know this is an oculus thread but i tried the vive recently and the resolution is good enough and I don't mean its only just sufficient, its not something I even thought about after a few moments in the VR world, image quality is good and I was pleasantly surprised. If the oculus is anywhere near the Vive then I would go somewhere for a demo and see for yourself (if you haven't already)
Every review I have seen states you can still see pixels. My experience with VR is that even with SDE removed resolution is a limiting factor. You seem to forget that people can test how such low resolution looks by setting their monitor to 1280x1024 or thereabouts. VR actually makes such low resolution even worse because the screens are much closer to your eyes and stretch over more of your FOV.
Setting a sim like DCS to 1280x1024 and setting it full screen on my 32" 4K monitor renders the cockpit instruments unreadable in most cases.
The VR experience is outstanding but the resolutions is unusable IMHO for sim flying.
Please don't try the "but VR is 2160 x 1200" it's not because each eye gets 1080x1200.
Setting a sim like DCS to 1280x1024 and setting it full screen on my 32" 4K monitor renders the cockpit instruments unreadable in most cases.
The VR experience is outstanding but the resolutions is unusable IMHO for sim flying.
Please don't try the "but VR is 2160 x 1200" it's not because each eye gets 1080x1200.
Last edited:
I'm not trying anything
I'm merely offering thoughts from my own experience without stats and specifications and I don't think you can really compare the resolution of a fixed size panel to what you see in VR , I'm not sure it works exactly the same way ? ,i don't think it looked the same to me but then again I wasn't looking for pixels and minute detail
I just wouldn't discount it just yet if you haven't tried it for yourself which I'm led to believe as you mention you're basing your thoughts from reviews
I've just watched the Tested video and the squeaking and creeking it makes when they adjust it seems inexcusable for a £500 device!
Being a fairly uneducated external observer to the VR thing, I've not seen the "OMG this thing is amazing!" immediate response to it that I've seen with other VR tech.
Being a fairly uneducated external observer to the VR thing, I've not seen the "OMG this thing is amazing!" immediate response to it that I've seen with other VR tech.
Associate
I've not tried the Vive yet (still on pre-order) but you are very correct for a hardcore sim. Resolution is everything. It may feel like you're there but being able to judge a dial or a number instantly is paramount.
Having said that, I don't do sims and for fast paced action I don't notice the resolution which is probably a good thing
This is only going to get better...
I've not tried the Vive yet (still on pre-order) but you are very correct for a hardcore sim. Resolution is everything. It may feel like you're there but being able to judge a dial or a number instantly is paramount.
Having said that, I don't do sims and for fast paced action I don't notice the resolution which is probably a good thing
I wish the low resolution was not a big deal for me because the experience of flying a plane with VR is absolutely stunning. So I envy the fact some people like yourself can look past the resolution issues.
Agreed so I hope it does not become a niche fad like Stereoscopic 3D.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 16,678
Hang on
If each eye is 1080x1200, then wont watching movies via the VR cinema apps look a bit rubbish
If each eye is 1080x1200, then wont watching movies via the VR cinema apps look a bit rubbish
Yep. I don't know why anyone has bought into this nonsense hype. Especially the 'movie theatre experience with friends'. This just means less of the already few pixels are being used to display the movie while it renders seating/the movie screen at an angle.Hang on
If each eye is 1080x1200, then wont watching movies via the VR cinema apps look a bit rubbish
Associate
Again, I'm one of the few where resolution doesn't matter, so watching what seems like a massive movie screen but at a lower res is fine for me. Although, having said that I do get bored quite easily so I've not tried sitting down for a massive 4 hour LOTR jaunt.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Nov 2010
- Posts
- 742
Have you actually tried it. The resolution is not an issue.
If you're really worried about the resolution (so many people have said it isn't a big deal), you could just wait until the second generation of headsets which will likely take no more than 2 years.
I'm sure with Oculus, HTC, and others all competing, the launch schedule may end up being a bit like the phone cycle. But I can't see it being as fast as every 12 months.
Point is though, looks almost certain Foveated rendering will be in the second generation since it's already quite far along in R&D. And if it is, it's also extremely likely they'll immediately quadruple the resolution to 2160x2400 per eye.
With the combination of foveated rendering, DX12, async compute, and possibly needing less MSAA due to the res increase, it's plausible something as powerful as a GTX 970/R9 390 could run 2160x2400 per eye.
I'm sure with Oculus, HTC, and others all competing, the launch schedule may end up being a bit like the phone cycle. But I can't see it being as fast as every 12 months.
Point is though, looks almost certain Foveated rendering will be in the second generation since it's already quite far along in R&D. And if it is, it's also extremely likely they'll immediately quadruple the resolution to 2160x2400 per eye.
With the combination of foveated rendering, DX12, async compute, and possibly needing less MSAA due to the res increase, it's plausible something as powerful as a GTX 970/R9 390 could run 2160x2400 per eye.
Last edited:
DK2 (owned for a few weeks), a very bried test of a HTC Vive and a fairly lengthy test of Gear VR. Gear VR has higher per eye (1440x1280) than both Vive and Rift. I found the resolution still to be an issue when it came to identifying objects at even reasonably close ranges. The reduction of the SDE effect did make a massive difference but the low resolution still rendered it unacceptable IMHO. Also the "not an issue" statement is totally subjective. Plenty of owners and reviews still raise resolution as an issue.
That is my plan, VR is a technology I want, just needs to be a better tech for me.
I don't think it's crazy for people to feel this way. I agree I can't wait for the resolution to at least quad, and may even move to 4320x4800 by the 3rd headset, may be quicker than people think.
At the same time though, I'm happy to pay for the 1st gen partly to prove the demand to developers, and also help fund the 2nd gen and make it better
I think it's a fair comment, but put simply there isn't a higher resolution option out there... even if there was then running it at decent settings at 90fps would be a challenge for even our atypically beefy rigs without foveated rendering, and even then you really need eye tracking to make the most of that.
I'm really excited about the experience of VR, so I'm willing to jump in now and enjoy it... even if it's not perfect. Plenty of people happily playing racing sims or even flight sims like war thunder with the lower res DK2... I'm sure it'd be even better with higher res of course, but it's clearly already an enjoyable experience for many.
If you can wait, then more power to you. I'm not disciplined enough to wait 2 or 3 years before the computer hardware and HMD tech catches up to a sufficient level!
I'm really excited about the experience of VR, so I'm willing to jump in now and enjoy it... even if it's not perfect. Plenty of people happily playing racing sims or even flight sims like war thunder with the lower res DK2... I'm sure it'd be even better with higher res of course, but it's clearly already an enjoyable experience for many.
If you can wait, then more power to you. I'm not disciplined enough to wait 2 or 3 years before the computer hardware and HMD tech catches up to a sufficient level!
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 9,952
You'll need 4K per eye to make the resolution problem go away. 2nd gen? More like 3rd gen at the earliest, and in 5 years. What GPU beast will you need? How thick the cables will have to be? Optical fibre? Compression? Foveated rendering? How much impact on latency? Can you even do this wirelessly? How about displays? Retinal projectors? How much? Nobody even knows, and they have some clever engineers who know of the problems but do not have a solution. There's no magic bullet, VR is gonna stay low-res for a long time.
Right now, it's 720p gaming. Not awesome, doesn't qyite work when you need long distance and small text clarity (Sims), but you can still do a lot.
If you want sims, you'll need some aids (zooming-in button, basically reducing the in-game FOV and increasing the PPD).
And then there is the tethering, and locomotion for 'room-scale'.
And then there is motion sickness, you vestibular system getting confused by what it sees and what it feels.
So yeah, problems. First-gen problems. Who'd have thought it.
Keep your expectations low, know what it and can't do, and it's still an experience like no other. I'm perfectly happy to sink £500 into that.
Right now, it's 720p gaming. Not awesome, doesn't qyite work when you need long distance and small text clarity (Sims), but you can still do a lot.
If you want sims, you'll need some aids (zooming-in button, basically reducing the in-game FOV and increasing the PPD).
And then there is the tethering, and locomotion for 'room-scale'.
And then there is motion sickness, you vestibular system getting confused by what it sees and what it feels.
So yeah, problems. First-gen problems. Who'd have thought it.
Keep your expectations low, know what it and can't do, and it's still an experience like no other. I'm perfectly happy to sink £500 into that.
Last edited:
At £540 for the Rift and £750 for the Vive I personally am not prepared to invest in the hope devs will fix the existing issues.
Soldato