STAR VR

[Barbajet]

I did try Vive and Oculus and they are good a great tracking system as expected for all VR sets.. but the resolution is still quite low .. dropping a good load of cash into this two first version is not recommended imo.. I did try and I did notice a step back on the FOV it's like flying with the old CRT monitor style , ofcourse much better but the feeling of been like having a horse vision is frustrating.. now in the other hand a new set will hit the market and imo is way better for what we will be using it for

 

Oculus and Vive are 2160 x 1200 and 110 FOV in total. which is low and cannot read my instruments.. for 700$ + now look at this one.

 

http://www.starvr.com/#techspecs

 

The STAR VR

5120x 1440 210 FOV

 

My choice will be clear... Can't wait

[Mango]

This is pretty interesting. I was planning to get the rift until I read this review today:

 

"This makes pixels obvious, giving each photo and video a blurry, grainy look. It's like going from a Blu-ray disk to a DVD on a large 60-inch HDTV." - http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/oculus-rift-first-australian-review-20160401-gnw003.html#ixzz44b9YV8QH

 

Unacceptable in my opinion. Guess I'll wait to see how things progress.

[Barbajet]

I do agree.

[aaron886]

The STAR VR

5120x 1440 210 FOV

 

Haha. And you thought 90hz with 2106x1200 was tough... :D

[Barbajet]

:) Yea LOL.. Lets see what the New GPU's reserve us :) Finger crossed

[Jacks]

Imagine the super computer required to run DCS on this thing at high settings!

[Greekbull]

Imagine the super computer required to run DCS on this thing at high settings!

 

Well considering I have no problem with 3840x 3240 with my current 4k and 1080p monitor now with my GTX 970s I would think the new Pascal chips releasing next month will have no problem with this. Excited to follow this BTW!

[cichlidfan]

Well considering I have no problem with 3840x 3240 with my current 4k and 1080p monitor now with my GTX 970s I would think the new Pascal chips releasing next month will have no problem with this. Excited to follow this BTW!

 

Can you maintain 90fps?

[Greekbull]

Can you maintain 90fps?

 

In 2.0 no problem I'm usually above 100. In 1.5 no...usually high 70s

[SkateZilla]

5120x1440 / 2x 5.5 QHD Displays, 530 PPI

 

Now Stretch that Horizontally 105 Degrees w/ Lenses,

And even with that 74 more PPI, you're stretching that image via lens across more ie 50 Degrees+ More.

 

Im Pretty sure it's maybe a smidge better than CV1, while likely costing significantly more.

[Kuky]

5120x1440 / 2x 5.5 QHD Displays, 530 PPI

 

Now Stretch that Horizontally 105 Degrees w/ Lenses,

And even with that 74 more PPI, you're stretching that image via lens across more ie 50 Degrees+ More.

 

Im Pretty sure it's maybe a smidge better than CV1, while likely costing significantly more.

 

The image quality might be little better, but very high FoV is a winner. With 210° FoV you would really be "in-there". 110° is still bit of tunnel vision.

 

I have cancelled my original OR pre-order some month ago because I thought this StarVR is much better because of very good FoV. But since more pixels and more FoV also means more objects in that FoV it would definitely require even better hardware then OR... in translation to us users, I think OR is good first choice VR for next 1-2 years at least, and later on when StarVR is out and if it does have that high FoV... it'll be a good switch from OR.

[SkateZilla]

Rift CV1 has Room to Upgrade screens....

[karn1948]

That's really interesting, although I wonder what sort of release date they are expecting. I imagine they will shoot for the holiday season, but that's just speculation, and who knows if they will be on target if that even is their target.

 

I'm sure the extra fov will make a big difference, but even the rift DK2 is convincing enough for me to prefer it over 3x monitors in most cases.

 

As for resolution... so what if it's like watching a DVD on a 4k screen? DVD's aren't nearly as sharp as blu-ray, but I don't feel that I get significantly less out of watching a movie on a DVD. Certainly there are some cases where it would make a meaningful difference, but for most it is superficial. I can't imagine any movies where I would say "oh man, I really wish I had watched that on blu-ray, the dvd quality just didn't live up to my expectations." I would, on the other hand, say that about 3d vs 2d for a few movies (Avatar), and the same goes for games in VR and in 2d. If you have triple 4k 3dtvs... well that might be a different story.

[pwambach]

Something to take into account. The main parts of the website hasn't been updated in a while. Most dates from the "Experience" refer to past 2015 dates. The only updates are the news section. There is no release date that I can find for the headset, so from my experience with the Rift you are looking at a good 2-3 years before a consumer version is available. Also I would expect the price to be way higher than the rift based on the screen quality choices. By the time they release it, I would bet Rift version 2 or 3 will be out with the same specs.

 

I have used Oculus DK1 and DK2 for the last couple years with DCS and hope that CV1 works better than the previous models.

 

If anyone knows when a release date is scheduled or if they are doing a developers kit let me know.

[KLR Rico]

I'm all for moving forward with VR tech, but this sounds like vaporware.

[karn1948]

from my experience with the Rift you are looking at a good 2-3 years before a consumer version is available.

 

Don't discount that part of the long development time on the Rift was that it was the first of it's kind, and a lot of things had to be figured out rather than copied / improved upon. A big part of that was also on the software side- developers had to learn how to develop for VR and get products into the pipeline so that a consumer version would have quality content at release. Now that we've broken ground, new entries into VR don't necessarily need anywhere close to the same development time.

[Barbajet]

Oculus is not the first of it's kind ;) I was testing in 1994 VR already . Lets say that it's a more modern hardware package for consumers .

 

STAR VR is also not the first .. I have seen prototypes with dual screens already even using Oculus system ;)

[karn1948]

Oculus is not the first of it's kind ;) I was testing in 1994 VR already . Lets say that it's a more modern hardware package for consumers .

 

STAR VR is also not the first .. I have seen prototypes with dual screens already even using Oculus system ;)

 

Well, I guess that depends on what we mean by "kind". Shoot, I remember playing with my neighbors Virtualboy when I was a kid. By "kind" I meant a consumer-marketable product. That requires a whole different development process than industrial products... consumers sure are a finicky group!

 

I wonder how many times marketing kicked back a Rift CV1 design and said "nope, people will look too stupid while wearing it, change it" :doh:

 

That is really interesting to hear about other dual-screen products though. I've heard about some other dual-screen prototypes being shown off, but I don't remember who was making them. Do you think that's where all HMD's need to go in the next few years?

Edited April 5, 2016 by karn1948

[TomOnSteam]

The big question is though, will DCS support StarVR?

[qqQ]

The main reason why I wont buy a VR-Headset in the next years is that I cant be sure whether I m able the VR-Games I want without fearing that they might only be released for a different system.

 

Hope we will get some kind of VR-standard.

[SkateZilla]

if every VR Headset is going to have it's own Proprietary API then it will fail,

 

Every Game developer is not gonna go back and add support for every headset as they come out.

[MegOhm_SD]

Would love to see some pics of you guys wearing these monitors on your heads. That would provide some good laughs.

[BigDuke6ixx]

I'm all for moving forward with VR tech, but this sounds like vaporware.

 

It fails my test:

 

1. Is it out now?

 

No

 

2. Can I pre order?

 

No

 

Test halted due to two negative answers.

 

Fail.

 

I think people who are bulking at buying VR now probably never will, because resolution will always be better on monitors.

Edited April 5, 2016 by BigDuke6ixx

[Swoodle]

.... probably never will, because resolution will always be better on monitors.

 

I think thats pretty short sighted. Mobile phones have started looking at 4k screens.. .. . . Might take a couple of yrs but next gen VR systems will almost certainly have dual 4k screens.

[karn1948]

The main reason why I wont buy a VR-Headset in the next years is that I cant be sure whether I m able the VR-Games I want without fearing that they might only be released for a different system.

 

Hope we will get some kind of VR-standard.

 

There's already a baseline standard that seems to be developing: OpenVR. It's supported by all three headsets that you can actually buy right now- Oculus Rift, HTC Vive, and OSVR dev kits. I think it's reasonable to assume that any smaller HMD would support OpenVR by default.

 

The Oculus API tries to add some creative features on top of what OpenVR supports, but I've tested games in both modes on my DK2 and if a developer doesn't support the Oculus API it's not that much of a loss.

 

I see the market currently as very similar to the early days of 3d accelerators. Every vendor has their own api that they think is best, but there's also a lot of effort being put into standardization and interoperability. The hardware manufacturers know that they can't survive on their own API island. But thankfully, unlike the early days of 3d accelerators, developers don't have to reinvent the wheel for each API- once you have one working right, supporting another isn't nearly as difficult.