Friday, September 28th 2018

A New Standalone VR Headset in Town: Oculus Quest Will Cost $399, Arrives In Spring 2019

Standalones headsets are the new flavor of the VR town this side of 2018. They bring a sorely needed dimension to this segment, allowing users to enjoy some VR experiences that are near what the Oculus Rift or HTC Vive offer, but with a much more palatable price and format. The ability to not be tethered also means being able to experience room-scale VR without having your lizard brain worry about tripping on cables either. This brings us to the Oculus Quest that was launched this week at the Oculus Connect 5 developer conference, just a couple of years after the debut of Project Santa Cruz that has finally culminated in a retail product.

The new wireless, standalone headset goes beyond what Oculus Go went to when announced earlier this year. Based on the Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (Oculus Go was based on a Snapdragon 821) and offering 64 GB of integrated storage, the Oculus Quest offers 1600x1440 resolution per eye and has full six degrees of freedom (6DOF) support versus the three degrees on the Oculus Go. The headset will be available in spring of next year for $399, and more details can be seen past the break.


The Oculus Go launched with the same idea, but this $199 headset was more akin to what a VR accessory for smartphones offered already. The new Oculus Quest is more ambitious and, besides avoiding the need for a smartphone or a PC, it includes touch motion controllers which will allow more of the Oculus Rift-like experiences and games to be supported on this new headset. Those Rift games won't be playable out of the box, but developers will have tools to port those titles easily. It is no secret that the majority of VR experiences today have not exactly been very demanding in graphical fidelity owing to the niche market, and developers wanting to make them accessible to as many people as possible- something that means catering to those with mainstream GPUs. As it stands, over 50 games will be available at launch according to Oculus, although we do not yet know how many of these are also PC VR titles.

In their official blog post, the company explains how they have included a new system that "uses four ultra wide-angle sensors and computer vision algorithms to track your exact position in real time without any external sensors." They went on to say that insight "gives you a greater sense of immersion, presence, and mobility, plus the ability to go beyond room-scale". Marketing talk no doubt, but this is still promising and exciting nonetheless- especially when John Carmack goes on to say that the headset is "in the neighbourhood of power of an Xbox 360 or PS3".


This announcement confirms the company's interest in the standalone devices market. Given the slow adoption of traditional tethered PC VR headsets such as the Rift and its competitor, HTC's Vive, trying to overcome their limitations while giving a "good enough" experience could make sense. Wired VR headsets can be annoying to set up and use, and smartphone based headsets are a good entry point to those experiences, but not much more. With standalone headsets that bring motion controllers, users can potentially get the benefits from both worlds: this could mean people could jump to VR gaming and experiences in a faster, much more comfortable and convenient way. There are still more hurdles to cross, but at the $399 price point the Oculus Quest needs to impress from day 1 if it wants to be a game changer.
Source: Oculus Blog
Add your own comment

20 Comments on A New Standalone VR Headset in Town: Oculus Quest Will Cost $399, Arrives In Spring 2019

#1
Mussels
Moderprator
Blah i want that type of headset, but compatible with SteamVR
Posted on Reply
#2
GreiverBlade
1600x1440 uh? technically my Nokia 8 (SD835 huhuhu ... ) in a Shinecon VR 2.0 has 1280x1440 per eyes .... sooo how is that standalone better than that (errr no 320 pixel more is not worth it ... ) the controller? that can be circumvented
added that i can play Steam VR games with Riftcat or any games with TrinusVR ... played with mouselook on gyro, with gamepad bluetooth controller and with a Leap motion ... the best one was still the XbOne controller tho ... well not anyone has enough volume in the living room to use motion controller (i tend to find them less precise and easy to use than standard controller ... a issue of habitude )

alright my Nokia 8 has a actual value of 499 (799 initially) but it's not just a VR headset

i rather take a PiMax VR 2.5K at the same price (well it's even cheaper by 35$ at my etailer at the present moment ) and keep my phone + VRH for the content that standalone offer than a Oculus Quest

399$ is at least 149$ too much for something like that

that thing will have the same customer review as the Go ... (which is 249chf where i live ... that's 100chf too much ... )

sample:
Only for stereoscopic videos
VR is still in its infancy, you can tell from all the latest eyewear. The Oculus Go is a simple and affordable entry, but plays in the league of Google Daydream or Gear VR and is not comparable to Rift and Vive, because the position in space is not recorded. In other words, the Oculus Go is great for stereoscopic videos as long as you do not move your head hard. For everything else not.

As with all VR glasses: Better test it before buying ...
-
Limited choice of content
-
App installation takes a long time
-
So far, no support from Google's VR180 format
-
Very high-resolution videos are only partially or only playable with certain apps
Posted on Reply
#3
Raunhofer
GreiverBlade
1600x1440 uh? technically my Nokia 8 (SD835 huhuhu ... ) in a Shinecon VR 2.0 has 1280x1440 per eyes .... sooo how is that standalone better than that (errr no 320 pixel more is not worth it ... ) the controller? that can be circumvented
added that i can play Steam VR games with Riftcat or any games with TrinusVR ... played with mouselook on gyro, with gamepad bluetooth controller and with a Leap motion ... the best one was still the XbOne controller tho ... well not anyone has enough volume in the living room to use motion controller (i tend to find them less precise and easy to use than standard controller ... a issue of habitude )

alright my Nokia 8 has a actual value of 499 (799 initially) but it's not just a VR headset

i rather take a PiMax VR 2.5K at the same price (well it's even cheaper by 35$ at my etailer at the present moment ) and keep my phone + VRH for the content that standalone offer than a Oculus Quest

399$ is at least 149$ too much for something like that

that thing will have the same customer review as the Go ... (which is 249chf where i live ... that's 100chf too much ... )

sample:
Only for stereoscopic videos
VR is still in its infancy, you can tell from all the latest eyewear. The Oculus Go is a simple and affordable entry, but plays in the league of Google Daydream or Gear VR and is not comparable to Rift and Vive, because the position in space is not recorded. In other words, the Oculus Go is great for stereoscopic videos as long as you do not move your head hard. For everything else not.

As with all VR glasses: Better test it before buying ...
-
Limited choice of content
-
App installation takes a long time
-
So far, no support from Google's VR180 format
-
Very high-resolution videos are only partially or only playable with certain apps
Okay, where to even start...
  • It is not 1600x1440 total, it is 1600x1440 per eye! So 4608000 pixels with 72 hz refresh rate. That's a huge load for a mobile SoC.
  • Comparing this to Shinecon VR 2.0 is like comparing radio to TV. Shinecon is just a phone holder with 3-DOF tracking. Oculus Quest is a 6-DOF all-in-one headset with 6-DOF controllers. 3-DOF means stuff like 360-videos: you can watch around but that's it. You can't lean for example. With 6-DOF you can move, walk, jump and crouch like in the real world. Oculus demoed Oculus Quest in a play area of 4000 sq feet! That's arena scale tracking.
  • Lenses are a very crucial part of a VR-product. The lenses that Quest has beat pretty much everything else. The image is very clear and free of artifacts. The quality difference to Shinecon or GearVR is staggering.
  • You can use your hands in VR and they move like they would in real life. Swing a sword, shoot with guns. You can even move your fingers. Show thumbs up, point etc.
  • Quest releases with over 50 games, The rift store has over 1000 games, so does Go. Many of the Oculus Quest's release games are actually ex PCVR games. Games like Robo Recall, The Climb, Superhot, Dead & Buried. Those are pretty serious AA-level games.
  • Oculus Go and Gear VR are mainly for videos, Quest is more for games. Console-grade games I mean.
It is absolutely true that Quest won't have as good graphics as PCVR headsets like the Rift nor can you play PC-games, but that's not the point. The point is that this is the very first console-like VR-headset and it is consoles that often lure the masses as you don't have to setup anything. You just buy the damn thing and enjoy. Ultimately, the perfect VR-headset won't require anything else than just the headset. That's the dream.

If you are wondering whether you should get Quest or Rift, it is essentially same as thinking whether you should go PlayStation or PC. The product categories are different. Don't expect this to be a Rift/Vive/Pimax killer because it tries not to. Quest competes with other consoles, like Nintendo Switch.

Btw, $399 is ridiculously cheap for something like that.
Posted on Reply
#4
Mindweaver
Moderato®™
@Raunhofer you are spot on! This is going to be great for anyone that wants to jump into room scale VR with hand tracking, without spending a lot of money on a pc. People need to understand that Oculus didn't create this to replace PCVR. It was created to capture the non-computer savvy users, but it's good enough for computer-savvy users to want it as well. I don't plan to buy this day one, but I do hope to have one sometime next year. One great game that would sell this unit, would be Beat Saber.

I was really hoping when they announced this at OC5 they would drop the price of Go to $149 or at least that was the rumor going around before OC5. Hopefully, it drops closer to Christmas and I can also see them dropping the price of the Rift to $350 as a promotion around Christmas.
Posted on Reply
#5
GreiverBlade
Raunhofer
Okay, where to even start...
  • It is not 1600x1440 total, it is 1600x1440 per eye! So 4608000 pixels with 72 hz refresh rate. That's a huge load for a mobile SoC.
  • Comparing this to Shinecon VR 2.0 is like comparing radio to TV. Shinecon is just a phone holder with 3-DOF tracking. Oculus Quest is a 6-DOF all-in-one headset with 6-DOF controllers. 3-DOF means stuff like 360-videos: you can watch around but that's it. You can't lean for example. With 6-DOF you can move, walk, jump and crouch like in the real world. Oculus demoed Oculus Quest in a play area of 4000 sq feet! That's arena scale tracking.
  • Lenses are a very crucial part of a VR-product. The lenses that Quest has beat pretty much everything else. The image is very clear and free of artifacts. The quality difference to Shinecon or GearVR is staggering.
  • You can use your hands in VR and they move like they would in real life. Swing a sword, shoot with guns. You can even move your fingers. Show thumbs up, point etc.
  • Quest releases with over 50 games, The rift store has over 1000 games, so does Go. Many of the Oculus Quest's release games are actually ex PCVR games. Games like Robo Recall, The Climb, Superhot, Dead & Buried. Those are pretty serious AA-level games.
  • Oculus Go and Gear VR are mainly for videos, Quest is more for games. Console-grade games I mean.
It is absolutely true that Quest won't have as good graphics as PCVR headsets like the Rift nor can you play PC-games, but that's not the point. The point is that this is the very first console-like VR-headset and it is consoles that often lure the masses as you don't have to setup anything. You just buy the damn thing and enjoy. Ultimately, the perfect VR-headset won't require anything else than just the headset. That's the dream.

If you are wondering whether you should get Quest or Rift, it is essentially same as thinking whether you should go PlayStation or PC. The product categories are different. Don't expect this to be a Rift/Vive/Pimax killer because it tries not to. Quest competes with other consoles, like Nintendo Switch.

Btw, $399 is ridiculously cheap for something like that.
well 1600x1440 per eye make 3200x1440 my Nokia 8 (which sport the same SOC as the Oculus Quest: a Snapdragon 835) has 2560x1440 ... hence my comment ...
as for movement ... space contraint make the Quest a bit ... well ... i am not one to move with a headset on my head nonetheless ...
ofc i don't intend to compare a 15$ VR phone holder + a 399$ phone to a 399$ standalone (after all it is capable to do the same and even more )


and nope 399$ is not a good price for something so limited :p (competing with a Switch? well i wonder which user we will see fall of a bridge or in a lake :laugh: never say never ... don't underestimate the humans ... Pokemon GO did show us that :shadedshu: )

from 264chf to 364chf i can get a real VR headset compatible with Steam VR (namely the PiMax VR 2.5K or for a little more a PiMax 4K ) okay still tethered to the comp but ... well battery constraint is not an issue, also the game that will be on the Quest will not be higher than what i run on my Nokia 8 (same soc ... ) although they are quite impressive, the games that run on a SD835 (still they are one full year late if using a SD835 )

also on the 399$

the Go was supposed to be, what? 199$? well that's 259-318chf .... (1:1 for USD most of the time ;) ) so the Quest will be 459-518chf (i hope not :laugh: otherwise i will be even more disappointed in my country's taxes )
Mindweaver
@Raunhofer you are spot on! This is going to be great for anyone that wants to jump into room scale VR with hand tracking, without spending a lot of money on a pc. People need to understand that Oculus didn't create this to replace PCVR. It was created to capture the non-computer savvy users, but it's good enough for computer-savvy users to want it as well. I don't plan to buy this day one, but I do hope to have one sometime next year. One great game that would sell this unit, would be Beat Saber.

I was really hoping when they announced this at OC5 they would drop the price of Go to $149 or at least that was the rumor going around before OC5. Hopefully, it drops closer to Christmas and I can also see them dropping the price of the Rift to $350 as a promotion around Christmas.
mmmhhh .... i am still not convinced ... oh well i drop the case but my concern remains.
Posted on Reply
#6
Mindweaver
Moderato®™
GreiverBlade
mmmhhh .... i am still not convinced ... oh well i drop the case but my concern remains.
No, you make very good arguments. I do agree that $399 will still be a tough sell, and I don't believe it's a Switch competitor either. but it's by far the cheapest complete VR experience or will be.. hehe It said it will have 50 titles at launch. Once we figure out all of them we will know what we are dealing with and if the 399 price tag is a truly good deal. One thing you are missing comparing it to your phone is that this unit won't have to do the phone stuff and will be better optimized for vr. Plus, it will get a lot of help from foveated rendering. The only bad part with it will be that it doesn't have eye tracking and it will be a fix foveated rendering method.

Next thing I worry about is the lack of a storage upgrade path. The base model will have 64gb and if they plan to have some pc titles then they will eat up 64gb's in no time. I was hoping for 80-128gb at 399, but that would push the base price.
Posted on Reply
#7
GreiverBlade
Mindweaver
Next thing I worry about is the lack of a storage upgrade path. The base model will have 64gb and if they plan to have some pc titles then they will eat up 64gb's in no time. I was hoping for 80-128gb at 399, but that would push the base price.
64gb was the main issue of the Go model ... :D

they could put a Micro-SD UHS-1 @83Mhz/SDR50 with a good card (around 90-100mb/s read) that can be viable for that purpose... but i doubt of it ... since it would mean the user could extend the storage for "cheap" (ex: i've found a neat 80mb/s 128gb card for 15$ recently, and a 100mb/s is around 40$ )
Mindweaver
No, you make very good arguments. I do agree that $399 will still be a tough sell, and I don't believe it's a Switch competitor either. but it's by far the cheapest complete VR experience or will be.. hehe It said it will have 50 titles at launch. Once we figure out all of them we will know what we are dealing with and if the 399 price tag is a truly good deal. One thing you are missing comparing it to your phone is that this unit won't have to do the phone stuff and will be better optimized for vr. Plus, it will get a lot of help from foveated rendering. The only bad part with it will be that it doesn't have eye tracking and it will be a fix foveated rendering method.
well ,i get it that my phone is less specialized (which is kinda a strong point in the end ) but i rather use it for the content meant for the Go and Quest and get a dedicated headset for the rest, although at the moment i am pretty much using it with gyroscope mouselook and my XbOne controller (tho Skyrim with Leap motion modding was kinda funny )

for me the cheapest VR experience ... would be as i wrote above ... aside from what i already experimented with, a PiMax 2.5K (363$, 229$ for a 4k demo model) and that's probably the next step i will take in VR unless a better offer arise... kinda like the Medion Erazer X1000 MR the controller are quite nice but it's still not mature enough (window MR that is, if only they did guarantee a SteamVR compatibility )
nonetheless per eye it's 1440x1440 90hz but LCD instead of OLED

oh... i didn't see that ... store.steampowered.com/app/719950/Windows_Mixed_Reality_for_SteamVR/
ah nonetheless the X1000 MR is still 270$ more than the demo PiMax 4k or 136$ more than the 2.5K

... VR should not be uncontrolled nor the user shouldn't be able to move too freely ... that's way too dangerous, i am a lifeguard ... i have high concern about others security ... ofc it can be secured but that's not optimal.



ah... yes the Quest could be a good entry point for a family with no one tech savvy about anything but console but still wanting a kind of VR console ... but well at that price ... better get a PSVR for a PS4 (and not let the kids play on the balcony ... the cable of the PSVR are not that strong ... specially above the 3rd floor ... :laugh: )
Posted on Reply
#8
Octavean
Oculus Quest Looks like it could be an interesting product. Its still something of an in between product in a quasi new market that some would already call niche. I can see why some would want one but the price does seem a bit high IMO.

Unfortunately Oculus hasn't solved the occlusion issues with "Inside Out" tracking and hand presence. So while RoboRecall may be a blast to play in general this and other great games will almost certainly have tracking problems with the Quest. So for example, when I play RoboRecall and other games like Space Pirate Trainer I often have my arms pointed in opposite directions and my head pointed in the direction such that I can look down the sights of one VR weapon in one hand. There is no way for the Quest to track the other hand in such situations so the tracking will fail.

Room scale with the Oculus Quest sounds great in theory. A higher resolution is a plus as is the 6 DOF and hand presence via the controllers. But when the tracking fails (and I don't see how it couldn't given the right conditions) all its great features won't account for much:


Personally I hope that better products come out.

IMO the occlusion issue is more then acceptable if they start building HMD models that can function in two modes. One mode is tethered to a PC with better outside in tracking + PC graphics and the other mode is stand alone with inside out tracking + SoC. If such a HMD has a choice then one can compromise ease of use, ease of setup, expense, HMD battery, HMD storage for games and tracking quality on the fly. The point is to not be locked in by the limitations of the different design choices of modality or tethered VR.
Posted on Reply
#9
Raunhofer
GreiverBlade
well 1600x1440 per eye make 3200x1440 my Nokia 8 (which sport the same SOC as the Oculus Quest: a Snapdragon 835) has 2560x1440 ... hence my comment ...
as for movement ... space contraint make the Quest a bit ... well ... i am not one to move with a headset on my head nonetheless ...
ofc i don't intend to compare a 15$ VR phone holder + a 399$ phone to a 399$ standalone (after all it is capable to do the same and even more )


and nope 399$ is not a good price for something so limited :p (competing with a Switch? well i wonder which user we will see fall of a bridge or in a lake :laugh: never say never ... don't underestimate the humans ... Pokemon GO did show us that :shadedshu: )

from 264chf to 364chf i can get a real VR headset compatible with Steam VR (namely the PiMax VR 2.5K or for a little more a PiMax 4K ) okay still tethered to the comp but ... well battery constraint is not an issue, also the game that will be on the Quest will not be higher than what i run on my Nokia 8 (same soc ... ) although they are quite impressive, the games that run on a SD835 (still they are one full year late if using a SD835 )

also on the 399$

the Go was supposed to be, what? 199$? well that's 259-318chf .... (1:1 for USD most of the time ;) ) so the Quest will be 459-518chf (i hope not :laugh: otherwise i will be even more disappointed in my country's taxes ).
Oculus Quest includes a tech called Insight (also known as Guardian) that displays a clear virtual wall when the user is about to leave the safe play area. Switch, phones and alike can't do that. So don't worry, you won't accidentally fall into pits of Mordor. And hey, not every game is requiring you to move. It's a common misconception that every VR game is about jumping and swinging. Some of the greatest VR games are seated experiences. If you like those more, cool, Quest has you covered. Performance-wise, Quest has technologies like fixed foveated rendering and Asynchronous Spacewarp that cannot be implemented on phones, but with VR HMDs they can really boost your performance beyond what you thought was possible.

And what on Earth you mean by limited? Real HMDs are generally speaking the most versatile entertainment machines there is. You can go to virtual cinemas with your friends, play all kind of games, browse web, watch TV on your own, Netflix, Hulu, Youtube and so on. I dare you to point out a more versatile product. $399 is a steal. Oculus can't fix your taxing though.

I get that Oculus Quest may not be for you, but you should really try it out when it releases. It is unlike any game console you have experienced before and the still unfold potential is absolutely nuts. How I see it, one of the biggest reasons why VR (and any new tech) sticks so slowly is that people don't really understand the tech. They are comparing it to phones, 3D-TVs and such. That's all understandable but you should really find out more and try it yourself.
Posted on Reply
#10
GreiverBlade
Raunhofer
Oculus Quest includes a tech called Insight (also known as Guardian) that displays a clear virtual wall when the user is about to leave the safe play area.
mmhhh interesting ... still not quite optimal, people often ignore wall ... but that's very specific
Raunhofer
And hey, not every game is requiring you to move. It's a common misconception that every VR game is about jumping and swinging. Some of the greatest VR games are seated experiences.
actually it might not look like but i have enough experience in that domain ... hence whey i pull up the concern i have... (i had a DK2 for some time )
Raunhofer
And what on Earth you mean by limited? Real HMDs are generally speaking the most versatile entertainment machines there is. You can go to virtual cinemas with your friends, play all kind of games, browse web, watch TV on your own, Netflix, Hulu, Youtube and so on. I dare you to point out a more versatile product. $399 is a steal.
yep stealing is the word ... also ... well .... i can do all that using my phone and the Shinecon VR 2.0 (yeah yeah ... i know i know ... sub par to the quest, but i still can do it ) i prefer keeping it that way and taking up the offer for the PiMax 4k at 229$ (dunno what i will do with the extra 170$ out of taxes or maybe 289$ tax included :laugh: kinda a joke .... just in case, the pricing with taxes might be lower than i expected but if at MSRP level ... still not in my alley)
Raunhofer
Oculus can't fix your taxing though.
so damn true .... as a matter of fact ... no one can ... :cry:
Raunhofer
I get that Oculus Quest may not be for you, but you should really try it out when it releases. It is unlike any game console you have experienced before and the still unfold potential is absolutely nuts. How I see it, one of the biggest reasons why VR (and any new tech) sticks so slowly is that people don't really understand the tech. They are comparing it to phones, 3D-TVs and such. That's all understandable but you should really find out more and try it yourself.
mhhh the end of the explanation doesn't fit me at all ... i am quite a pro-VR actually i find Windows MR to be quite more interesting in that sense ... and the HMD from Lenovo Medion and on a lesser extent Acer, they have good controller and are priced adequately (which is most of the time only 50-60$ more than the Oculus Quest :laugh: ), Oculus disgusted me with pricing ... and they still do it ... HTC did redeem that side OSVR did a tad better too but .... yuck Razer ... and PiMax kinda suprised me (tested one 2.5k, quite good for the price )
Posted on Reply
#11
Octavean
Raunhofer
How I see it, one of the biggest reasons why VR (and any new tech) sticks so slowly is that people don't really understand the tech. They are comparing it to phones, 3D-TVs and such. That's all understandable but you should really find out more and try it yourself.
You make a very good point. VR is something you really have to try for yourself to fully understand it. The experience is the thing and there is no substitute. The other issue is that all VR HMD setups aren't the same. For example, if someone tried a Gear VR Powered by Oculus HMD its not the same experience as an Oculus Rift. However, the uninitiated might mistakenly assume that if the tried one they have essentially tried them all. Even the same HMD like the HTC Vive Pro might yield different experiences depending on setup (PC configuration and Play area).

I bought a PSVR as a gift for my kids. Its a very different experience then the Oculus Rift I bought for myself some time later. When there are true generational gaps between HMDs that is when we will likely start to see noteworthy improvements (through the generations) and lower prices.
Posted on Reply
#12
Vayra86
Raunhofer
How I see it, one of the biggest reasons why VR (and any new tech) sticks so slowly is that people don't really understand the tech. They are comparing it to phones, 3D-TVs and such. That's all understandable but you should really find out more and try it yourself.
My view on the slow adoption rate is different

- current iterations are uncomfortable, and they will be for a long time. The HMD is heavy and sweaty. Oculus Quest fixes only the 'tethered' part of uncomfortable. Its the same thing as 3D glasses for a TV. Most people don't want to look like idiots and use uncomfortable hardware. If the HMD is sized and designed like a Google Glass, then we can actually talk about mass adoption.

- performance requirements are still far too high. VR is not efficient enough for decent experiences with reasonable hardware requirements. The HMD is only 1/3rd of the total cost of ownership, if you consider what's really needed for a good experience. That also means the price of HMDs is not really a factor. Adoption didn't jump up or even recover when the prices were slashed. Its still a niche, and growth still declines.

- space requirements are also problematic. You need a playroom or VR will end up in drama at some point. For a domestic situation that is a problem that will never really go away. People already tossed Wii nunchucks in each others' faces, imagine what happens when you're physically blind.

- content is the final issue, but this one is fixable. However you do need enough of a push, and the initial push clearly wasn't enough. Also, you can push real hard but without covering the above problems, that is going to be pointless anyway.

To me, VR looks like a solution that only introduces new problems when it comes to content consumption and entertainment. In some settings it really works well, for example for simulating cockpit view in games like Flight sims etc. I also think it really does have value in the business setting, of customer experiences, guided tours etc. Beyond that? Not really gonna fly.
Posted on Reply
#13
GreiverBlade
Octavean
You make a very good point. VR is something you really have to try for yourself to fully understand it. The experience is the thing and there is no substitute. The other issue is that all VR HMD setups aren't the same
then you should re read my postes :p if the point was aimed at me, then it's void ;) i know my stuff and that's why i do raise point that overly enthusiast person would not notice (or will blindly choose to ignore them ) i do have an interest in VR , i technically tested all the HMD but only really owned a DK2 .... tho Windows MR seems to get more interesting (and they have a price equivalent to the Quest or Go while being almost like the Rift and Vive) and some extra concurrent are actually doing almost better while being cheaper (Pimax and OSVR )

but my remark about the Go and Quest being limited ... well YES they are both limited, storage? abysmal, power supply? well it's battery powered ... and it seems the charge time is quite annoying versus the play time... (from the Go user impression ) hardware wise ? ok the SD825 and 835 are beast ... (for smartphone ... after all a 835 equiped still goes toe to toes with 2018 flagship 1 yrs after their introduction ) but it is also a limitation

i get the Go and Quest are a good entry point for VR experience but the pricepoint of both stick me in the throat
Vayra86
My view on the slow adoption rate is different

- current iterations are uncomfortable, and they will be for a long time. The HMD is heavy and sweaty. Oculus Quest fixes only the 'tethered' part of uncomfortable. Its the same thing as 3D glasses for a TV. Most people don't want to look like idiots and use uncomfortable hardware. If the HMD is sized and designed like a Google Glass, then we can actually talk about mass adoption.

- performance requirements are still far too high. VR is not efficient enough for decent experiences with reasonable hardware requirements. The HMD is only 1/3rd of the total cost of ownership, if you consider what's really needed for a good experience. That also means the price of HMDs is not really a factor. Adoption didn't jump up or even recover when the prices were slashed. Its still a niche, and growth still declines.

- space requirements are also problematic. You need a playroom or VR will end up in drama at some point. For a domestic situation that is a problem that will never really go away. People already tossed Wii nunchucks in each others' faces, imagine what happens when you're physically blind.

- content is the final issue, but this one is fixable. However you do need enough of a push, and the initial push clearly wasn't enough. Also, you can push real hard but without covering the above problems, that is going to be pointless anyway.

To me, VR looks like a solution that only introduces new problems when it comes to content consumption and entertainment. In some settings it really works well, for example for simulating cockpit view in games like Flight sims etc. I also think it really does have value in the business setting, of customer experiences, guided tours etc. Beyond that? Not really gonna fly.
glad to see that some of my concerne are also shared by other.

also for cockpit view ... Gyroscope mouseloook in Elite Dangerous is awesome xD
Posted on Reply
#14
Octavean
GreiverBlade
then you should re read my postes :p if the point was aimed at me, then it's void ;)
With all due respect, the point wasn't aimed at you.

I was quoting Raunhofer because I agreed with his point in general terms.
Posted on Reply
#15
Animalpak
Im curious to try it with driving games
Posted on Reply
#16
GreiverBlade
Animalpak
Im curious to try it with driving games
urrrfff.... i did read : "i'm curious to try it while driving" ... ... :laugh: first thought : *humpf ... typical VR standalone user* (/joke)
Posted on Reply
#17
Octavean

This is a fairly good preview IMO but its long.

Apparently, according to the "Tested" preview, the Oculus Quest Touch controllers are tracked about as well as the Oculus Rift Touch Controllers. I find that hard to believe but at about ~21min in they addressed the Occlusion issue and it is indeed there as expected. I'm sure 99% of the time it wont be an issue but it depends on the mechanics of the game.

I still think its priced a bit high but without a doubt its price will drop over time. Also how much such a thing cost with respect to MSRP seeming too high is an individual thing. The variable here is individual tolerance for pain in this regard. So for example, some people may pre-order an RTX 2080 Ti because the price doesn't seem that high with respect to their income or its subsidized because their employer pays for a new PC every few years (or whatever).

So the Quest will be avialble in the spring of 2019 which doesn't seem so far out.

Personally I am more interested in Oculus Rift 2 and HTC Vive 2.
Posted on Reply
#18
Mindweaver
Moderato®™
The more I see it the more I want it, but while the $399 price is much better than the price I thought it was going to be; it still won't be a day one purchase for me. I still want to see the full day one lineup of 50 games and how they perform. I know asking for Stormland is out of the question, but they could have some type of variant for the Quest.

Next, I really want to know the charge time with it having a C-usb type. Hopefully, it has a much faster recharging time than the Go model.
Posted on Reply
#19
Octavean
With respect to charging and battery life I am more interested in real world run time. Also it would be interesting to know if you can extend the run time with something like an Anker PowerCore Power Bank.

So just put the Anker in a pocket or a belt attachment and run a USB-C cable to the Quest HMD
Posted on Reply
#20
Gordbill
GreiverBlade
then you should re read my postes :p if the point was aimed at me, then it's void ;) i know my stuff and that's why i do raise point that overly enthusiast person would not notice (or will blindly choose to ignore them ) i do have an interest in VR , i technically tested all the HMD but only really owned a DK2 .... tho Windows MR seems to get more interesting (and they have a price equivalent to the Quest or Go while being almost like the Rift and Vive) and some extra concurrent are actually doing almost better while being cheaper (Pimax and OSVR )

but my remark about the Go and Quest being limited ... well YES they are both limited, storage? abysmal, power supply? well it's battery powered ... and it seems the charge time is quite annoying versus the play time... (from the Go user impression ) hardware wise ? ok the SD825 and 835 are beast ... (for smartphone ... after all a 835 equiped still goes toe to toes with 2018 flagship 1 yrs after their introduction ) but it is also a limitation

i get the Go and Quest are a good entry point for VR experience but the pricepoint of both stick me in the throat


glad to see that some of my concerne are also shared by other.

also for cockpit view ... Gyroscope mouseloook in Elite Dangerous is awesome xD
Here is my two cents. People are going to be amazed with the quest. Some people don’t really understand what they have done with the 835. It’s quite a bit more powerful then the go and the graphics are going to surprise a lot of people. Is it up there with rifts very best graphics? Of course not but most people don’t even know the quest will have a active cooling fan which is going to also help with performance. I was lucky to see a game that will be released on quest that looks amazing. Quest will be using most if not all of the 835 for VR unlike a phone that uses it for background stuff etc, I don’t think once people actually play it they will care for the small drop in performance. Super hot VR looks almost duplicate to the rift version but actually is more immersive. As far as the hand controls they are excellent on par with rift and being able to move around freely instead of wires hanging all over the place is a huge plus. I know oculus said they won’t forget about the rift but just my opinion I believe within 5 years standalone will be the only way to go and oculus knows it. There is lady who is a developer that when asked on video if there is any chance rift will be obsolete at one point and is this the direction you will be going down the road she didn’t reply just shook her head and smiled. I was shocked she didn’t at least have a company line. Lol. There’ will be a lot of games ported over and I know everyone is saying the game will be stripped down version but if you listen to the developer of the climb he basically said with all the optimizations and tricks people are going to be really impressed and it’s very close to what it’s like on the rift. He went further saying it actually will be a better experience on the quest and more immersive. That’s just my 2 cents.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment