Chivas

Possible but unlikely. Oculus has amassed a very large talented company, with new hiring's, and tech company buyouts. That said, Oculus has been very quite lately, but that obviously doesn't mean they went on holidays. With so many new companies with large budgets entering the market, they have to keep their development work much closer to the vest.

Both the Rift and Vive use the same resolution displays, but your right, the Rift is clearer because it uses slightly smaller displays with more pixels per inch, but at the cost of a slight loss of FOV. Clarity is far more important attribute than FOV with these early relatively low resolution headsets, especially in regards to flight sims. I would imagine that the Rift displays could also have more attributes than just pixels per inch, considering Oculus partnership with Samsung.

Hi Mysticpuma, I game my DK2 to ATAG Colander, so he may be one of the best guys to talk to regarding setup issues. The DK2 is at best a proof of concept. The CV1 is much better, but it still may be in your best interest to wait for the next generation of VR headsets with should have much better FOV, higher resolutions, and the eyetracking necessary for even higher resolutions..

Your right, the Vive can't fully match the Rifts visual clarity simply because the Rift display has smaller gaps between pixels, but thats at the cost of FOV at these relatively low resolution headsets. The Vive does has a slightly larger FOV, but at this point clarity is more important that FOV especially in flight sims at least until resolutions are significantly improved.

You'd be even glader if you waited for 16K VR. ;) But wait 32K may not be too far behind.

Waiting is definitely not a bad idea, but the analogy has always made me laugh. Even if they waited for the fourth version of VR the fifth version would be better. If people followed this advice they would never buy a VR headset, while others would have been enjoying VR for many years. Even the early prototypes provided many hours off entertainment.

This is new tech, and it should be obvious to anyone that things will improve and change fast. Complaining about minimum spec changes is quite frankly ridiculous.

You will find folks who prefer the very good Vive system, BUT the majority of users and devs that have owned and tested BOTH prefer the Rift in flight sims for a number of reasons. Mainly comfort, displays clarity/larger sweetspot, easy pixel density settings, and most importantly its ATW software. The only advantage the Vive has in flight sims is its slight higher FOV, at the cost of display clarity. What's the point of a slightly higher FOV, if it makes spotting distant targets that much harder. Either way both systems are lacking the quality necessary for the best flight sim experience, but even with its flaws, its awesome immersive experience makes going back to a monitor very difficult to impossible.

The Vive is a very good product, but its clearly not superior to the Rift especially for flight sims. I'm sure that ED would like to improve its Vive support, but the current Vive hardware and software just isn't up to the Rifts capabilities. Its also highly unlikely Oculus will be the big loser in the virtual reality competition. So far Oculus has been investing the most resources into VR market, especially when you look at the new very high tech facility Facebook just built so they can easily design, fabricate, and test new VR systems in house. That's not to say that some smaller outfit won't develop the killer VR feature, its just not as likely.

I found the Oculus RMA service extremely polite, easy to deal with, but excruciatingly slow. It felt like they were purposefully delaying the RMA until they had more product available. Its all sorted now, but hopefully they can streamline their support services at some point.

Oculus uses a custom combination of regular and Fresnel lenses, that may have been made from a completely different material than the Vive Fresnel lenses, so using the same technic for cleaning, could be a mistake.

Oculus isn't going anywhere, they have invested far more monies into VR hardware, and VR game software than any other company. Steam is primarily a store that sells third party software. People who have both, obviously prefer the Vive with games that use tracked controllers, and use the Rift for almost everything else, especially cockpit games. When the Oculus Touch tracked controllers comes out with all the related VR software that Oculus has been investing in, most people will prefer the Rift for most everything. That's not to say the Vive isn't good, its just not as good as the Oculus system, especially for flight sims. The Rift is a little more comfortable, with a little better displays/optics, along with better ATW software, that allows higher pixel density settings. The Vive has a slightly better FOV, but judder free clarity trumps FOV in these first versions of VR hardware..

I don't think its a case of ED favoring Oculus. Its more a factor of ED having access to Oculus prototypes, and software for a much longer period of time. Not to mention that the Oculus software has had more time to be refined, and is "currently" more capable. That's not to say that OpenVR won't improve, but I see Oculus SDK improving at a constant rate considering the resources Oculus can throw at it.

Your right about the res Dot, I had a brain fart, and agree that there is far more than just Resolution in these current headsets that defines the quality of image. The RGB screen might have better image quality, but it begs the question why Oculus didn't put an RGB display into their headsets. There are always trade offs, cost wasn't an issue, and they had Samsung as a partner. As it is Samsung created a smaller custom higher fill rate display for the Rift, but at the cost of FOV, as image quality is more important than FOV in these early consumer versions.

The Rift uses custom lenses, that try to use the best qualities of Fresnel, and normal optic lenses, along with a larger sweetspot. Its definitely not perfect, but they are best solution so far. Oculus is able to spend a considerable amount of monies on R&D, so the next generation combination of higher res displays and improved optics should help flight sims considerably.

Having a higher res display is great, BUT its a combination of a number of factors that makes it a decent experience. How much computer power is required to drive the higher resolution display at 90fps. I'd be very leery of this product until I heard how well it runs DCS. There is a definite reason that Vive and Oculus settled on their current display resolutions. Even with these lower resolutions is not easy to run complex flight sims, and the only reason its just satisfactory is the ATW software. A higher res and no ATW would probably make it an almost unplayable experience. Atleast we knew it was possible to run DCS with the Rift and Vive as DCS was implementing support for these headsets. I hope this new prototype headset works well, as competition is a great thing, but I have serious doubts.

If your 980 has two HDMI ports, or your monitor has a display port then you should be fine.. For some reason many of the new gpu's come with 3 Display Ports, and only one HDMI port. I had to buy a Display Port to HDMI adapter, as my monitor and Rift both required an HDMI port.

Here's a good comparison of the Vive and Rift in cockpit sims, from a DK1, DK2, CV1 and Vive owner. He love them both, but his family uses the Vive more.

Palmer has stated recently that Oculus should be caught up with orders in August or before if all works out. Anyway I would have serious reservations about ordering from Oculus. If you have to go thru the Oculus RMA process, good luck to you. Although that might speed up as well when orders catch up. The better option might be thru BestBuy if your close enough to one that sells them. You might have to wait for their next shipment to fill the RMA order, but it would still likely to be weeks quicker than the Oculus RMA process. Maybe order thru Oculus and cancel it if one come available at your local Bestbuy.

For those wondering if they made the right VR headset choice for flight sims, here's a youtube video from UKRifter, who owns the DK1, DK2, CV1, and Vive. He loves his Vive, Rift, and the Vive gets more use with his family, and he makes some very interesting points on scale etc. In this case he's running Project Cars, but has done a number of flight sims aswell.

How well does the pixel density work on the Vive thru SteamVR and can people run it with no problems. My first thought was that it may be a problem as some people have suggested the Vive already struggles with judder because its ATW type software doesn't appear to work quite as well as the Oculus ATW software. Since that is a software feature, I see no reason why Vive can't improve it at some point. I'm not trying to start a Vive vs Oculus argument, just trying to find more info on the Pros and Cons in DCS. DCS has gone out of its way not to suggest which headset is better, and doesn't appear to be favoring one over the other. Its just that currently the Rift appears to have a few better features to implement. As far as room scale in DCS, nobody has a room large enough to walk around an aircraft let alone a carrier. I'm not sure I like the current modes of movement, but when they do figure it out roomscale in DCS could be a fun feature.

Its probably a good idea to wait for the second generation VR headsets for higher resolutions, and possibly higher FOV's. DO NOT LOOK AT YOUTUBE VIDEO's to assess the resolution quality of VR headsets, as its much worse in the actual headset. That said most people who currently use the latest VR headsets, have little interest in going back too a Monitor and TrackIR, the immersion is that good, even with the low res. Personally I will enjoy what the current CV1 Rift has to offer now, and upgrade to the next generation, which ever is better when they come out. IF you decide to bight the bullet now, and flight sims are your primary entertainment, then the Rift is the way to go. There will be Vive users who will say the Vive is better, but most flight devs, and users who have tried both prefer the Rift for comfort, display clarity, ATW software, and pixel density adjustment, etc. Although if your IPD is higher than 70, then I would take a closer look at the Vive, which I believe adjusts a couple of settings higher.

Oculus isn't ignoring any details relating to FOV. BOTH Vive and Oculus settled on relatively the same resolution displays because of consumer system requirement restrictions. Although Oculus uses a smaller display which allowed for the same amount of pixels in a smaller space, creating a sharper picture. The weak resolutions of these first consumer versions made clarity more important than FOV. This will change for the better in time. I'm sure Oculus could have had Samsung make them a higher resolution, higher FOV, displays, BUT very few would have home systems capable of driving them. This is the reason StarVR is currently not entering the consumer market, and concentrating on big business markets. This could change if techs like eyetracking enable high resolution rendering only where the eyes are focused. I'm sure Vive and Oculus are also doing the R&D necessary to enable High Res/High FOV displays in future consumer versions. For the consumer market Oculus/Samsung has the people, money to likely win that race. Personally I don't care which group does it best, and will just buy the product that does.

Again you don't know what your talking about. Where does it suggest I don't read the forums. Just because someone doesn't join the Lemming cliff jumpers, doesn't mean I don't get a kick out of watching them jump. Most are hypocrites anyway, taking the moral highground, while stealing all software they can get their hands on, then wondering where all the flight sim developers went. I've been following VR closely since the Oculus kickstarter days. Everyone loved Oculus, some hated Steam, until Facebook acquired the firm. Then the Facebook haters lost their minds, suggesting Facebook would dumb down the headset for only social experiences, and any other nonsense they could think of. The exact opposite happened, Facebook monies allow Oculus too acquire some of the brightest people, build custom VR parts, and further fund VR software developers. Personally I could care less about Facebook, don't use it, and probably never will. I also don't hate Vive. I think their system is great, but just have the opinion that the Rift is more refined, especially for flight sims. That has been born out by most users, and flight sim devs who have experience with both headsets. When the Touch controllers come out, they also look to be more refined than the Vive wands. They should be considering the time and monies Oculus has available for R&D etc etc. Unfortunately Fanboyism won't let people look at the big picture, and just ignore facts that don't their argument, and they hitch their wagon to any nonsense in the forums, that suits their position. I usually only post in support of Oculus when a Vive fanboy can't sing the praises of his Vive headset without adding ill informed bullsh*t about the Rift. People continue to suggest that the Rift won't be able to do roomscale VR, which is total nonsense. Two Rift trackers can be placed anywhere the user wants, and will have the exact same exclusion problems as the Vive. This has been proven, and posted by many users in the forums you suggest that I don't read. Valve originally had no intention of developing a consumer version of their VR hardware projects, and had no problem working with Oculus while they were doing R&D on their consumer version. Up till then Valve spent very little monies on VR software until Vive came into the picture, and they decided to build their own hardware unit. Oculus had been investing in VR software for almost two years before that happened, as they knew there was no point in investing in hardware if there was not enough good VR content. Oculus also knew they had to have some control over the quality of the VR software, as bad VR software would kill VR hardware no matter how good the hardware is. Hence Oculus Home, where they could control the quality, and recoup some of the huge investments they've been making in VR hardware/software over the last few years. Oculus stated from the beginning they were going to sell their hardware near cost, and planned to make their profit on the software side. Oculus will have no problem competing with anyone on the hardware side, but yes there will be some exclusives, while Oculus establishes its position in the market to compete with the Steam store. That's the reality, and no amount of hand wringing, or forum whinging will change that. I have no allegiance to AMD or Nvidia, but just buy the one that best suits my needs, the same goes for Vive, and Oculus. There is no question that currently the Rift is better for my needs in flight sims, and if I want to venture into roomscale later, I have little doubt that the Rift controllers will easily compete with the Vive wands. If that changes I will be the first to buy Vive, or some other competitor. I could care less fanboy allegiances.

You've got to be kidding. The last thing most forum users want to understand is facts, especially when it doesn't suit their agenda. Most of the forums are dominated by the "Sky is Falling" types, who think Oculus having a few exclusives is going to kill Oculus, and VR in general.