Oculus rift s is coming!

[Harlikwin]

The rift-s market is not the sim market. I figured it would be crap when their head guy quit saying he didnt want to be part of the race to the bottom in VR.

[FragBum]

This about sums up where Rift is heading note the front page headlines image in the article, very telling.

 

 

Luckey eh!..:music_whistling:

[backspace340]

Yo don't need to use all the resolution right now ... you can set less that 1.0 supersampling, you'll have the same software resolution that Rift S, and less SDE.

 

But when the software improves (FFR) or you have a better graphics card, your HMD will be ready

 

You won't even necessarily need to do that, I used to run my Odyssey at 1.5PD on a 1080ti (1440x1440 multiplied by 1.5 = 2160x2160), and that was perfectly playable (45+FPS). I've since backed off to 1.4 so I can add x2 MSAA, but I'm expecting to be able to run the Reverb on my 1080ti at 1.0PD possibly with x2 MSAA as well but I'll have to see. If you have a 2080ti you can probably even add some extra PD.

[nessuno0505]

Just 2 considerations:

 

1) Rift s has not built-in headphones, but the ones included in the regular rift are certainly not high-end phones. If premium headphones are too bulky for the new Rift s headstrap, you can of course plug earphones (and you can find some of high quality on the market).

 

2) Is Rift s an upgrade over regular Rift? More likely it is. I've already upgraded my RAM and my GPU and I'm not interested in spending 800 bucks for a super-premium new HMD (even the best on the market today is the same generation as the regular rift: no eye tracking and no foveated rendering yet). But 200 bucks + selling my regular rift to have a slightly improved HMD as the new rift s is something I can afford right now, while I wait to put the big money in the future for a really 2nd generation HMD, when we'll get one.

[cercata]

but I'm expecting to be able to run the Reverb on my 1080ti at 1.0PD possibly with x2 MSAA as well but I'll have to see.

We wait for you feedback about that Reberv

[YoYo]

About headphones - its a good move for me. Use own, in most cases better than default headphones. For example I dont want headset with fixed build headphones like Vive Pro. Just as option.

[rogonaut]

you could remove the headphones anyway. rift s seems very disappointing, less fov - ouch.

 

hp reverb looks much more promissing

[71st_Mastiff]

I'm on the fence holding out for the new HTC, I have the Rift and I'm very disappointed for the specs on the new Rift S. Sound like to me FB is trying to leave the market of VR, and turning over their partnership to Lenovo.

 

Pi-Max and HTC looks like they are going to be the big companies taking over, this is to bad for the Oculus Rift business. I see them going down the tubes now. FaceBook killed the Oculus!!!

 

Must of been all those lawsuits.

[Shortcut]

I'm looking into VR for the first time was very interested in the Oculus Rift S but not so much now. I think I'm going to wait for the HP Reverb or the new HTC Vive Cosmos, which look interesting according to there sight but they still don't have any specs listed. I would rather get something I will enjoy.

[some1]

Vive Cosmos could be anything, including direct equivalent of Rift S from HTC.

 

Reverb is interesting but only if you have PC beefy enough to power those hi-res screens. Other than that, it has similar specs to Rift S (LCD screen, no hardware IPD, similar FOV). Plus all the issues with WMR software as a bonus.

[Icebeat]

The rift-s market is not the sim market. I figured it would be crap when their head guy quit saying he didnt want to be part of the race to the bottom in VR.

 

+1

[Harlikwin]

Vive Cosmos could be anything, including direct equivalent of Rift S from HTC.

 

Reverb is interesting but only if you have PC beefy enough to power those hi-res screens. Other than that, it has similar specs to Rift S (LCD screen, no hardware IPD, similar FOV). Plus all the issues with WMR software as a bonus.

 

Cosmos is more promising, in the sense it "provides the sharpest visuals in any Vive", plus it more or less looks identical to the qualcomm reference set that used 2160 screens.

[nessuno0505]

I do not agree. Reverb probably needs a beefy GPU to perform (neither a 2080ti can render a 4k screen at 90 Hz); we do not know nothing about Vive cosmos, but it will likely have similar higher resolution too, and probably a high price. People complain about narrow fov, but a wider fov with a standard screen or even a fixed foveated rendering (higher res only in the center of the screen) is not a good choice IMHO: often you do not move your head but only your eyes. We need variable foveated rendering with eye tracking (foveated = from fovea, the sharpest part of the retina: if the high-res rendered part of the screen does not follow the fovea, i.e. eye tracking, but is fixed in the center of the screen, you cannot either properly call it "foveated"). Until then, I prefer a lower fov / lower res HMD but fully rendered. In addition, I find oculus software way better than steam VR (never tried windows mixed reality). If you consider all the above, the rift s is not so disappointing in the end, and it is also a cheaper choice.

Edited March 22, 2019 by nessuno0505

[some1]

Cosmos is more promising, in the sense it "provides the sharpest visuals in any Vive", plus it more or less looks identical to the qualcomm reference set that used 2160 screens.

 

According to HTC themselves, Cosmos is not a replacement of Vive or Vive Pro, but rather as an easy to use and flexible headset. Whatever that means.

[nessuno0505]

I did not know this, and is something to think about...

 

P.S. you are "some1", and I am "nessuno" (in italian it means no1! :lol: )

[dburne]

I'm on the fence holding out for the new HTC, I have the Rift and I'm very disappointed for the specs on the new Rift S. Sound like to me FB is trying to leave the market of VR, and turning over their partnership to Lenovo.

 

Pi-Max and HTC looks like they are going to be the big companies taking over, this is to bad for the Oculus Rift business. I see them going down the tubes now. FaceBook killed the Oculus!!!

 

Must of been all those lawsuits.

 

Not really Oculus is very much committed to VR - just apparently not so much the "high end" PC-VR that we prefer for what we do.

They are more focused on much larger adoption rate. We are very much in the minority.

 

There probably is not a bigger fan of Oculus than I have been, but now that is changing. I built this rig for high end PC-VR in hopes of a new Rift, and likely will be going with the upcoming HP Reverb unless I hear some outstanding reports that surprise me on the Rift S.

I will still be using my Rift CV1 with Touch for some Oculus games on occasion.

[rogonaut]

everyone who tried a pimax will concur, a bigger fov makes a huge difference. rift s is no improvement in my opinion, too little difference to predecessor... why make lesser fov then rift cv1, whats the point? the goggle effect is very much noticable on that one.

[some1]

everyone who tried a pimax will concur, a bigger fov makes a huge difference. rift s is no improvement in my opinion, too little difference to predecessor... why make lesser fov then rift cv1, whats the point? the goggle effect is very much noticable on that one.

 

They say the FOV is "a little bigger" than CV1, not smaller. Which probably means it's on par with other headsets, as CV1 was always lacking in that regard.

If you want more FOV, Pimax is the only affordable option right now.

[John Hargreaves]

I'm looking into VR for the first time was very interested in the Oculus Rift S but not so much now. I think I'm going to wait for the HP Reverb or the new HTC Vive Cosmos, which look interesting according to there sight but they still don't have any specs listed. I would rather get something I will enjoy.

 

I think you would be the sort of person for whom Rift S makes the most sense. I can see a good case for going with the S as a first step into VR. It is quite good value for money, decent resolution and tracking, ideal for getting into VR. For those who have been onboard for 2-3 years, I think it's a far less compelling purchase, just not enough of an upgrade from CV1.

[nessuno0505]

I don't know, maybe for a room scale experience a bigger fov is important, but jet pilots wear helmets IRL, and when I ride my motorbike wearing a helmet my field of view is not so much wider then the one I have using my CV1. CV1 fov has never been an issue in my experience.

[javelina1]

I think you would be the sort of person for whom Rift S makes the most sense. I can see a good case for going with the S as a first step into VR. It is quite good value for money, decent resolution and tracking, ideal for getting into VR. For those who have been onboard for 2-3 years, I think it's a far less compelling purchase, just not enough of an upgrade from CV1.

Good point John.

[nessuno0505]

For those who have been onboard for 2-3 years, I think it's a far less compelling purchase, just not enough of an upgrade from CV1.

 

I'm with CV1 from the beginning, when it was sold without touch controllers, and I'm considering an upgrade to rift s: to get rid of the external sensors is a big deal (3 more free USBs) and the specs are better enough to improve the experience but not to put my 2070 in trouble. If I can sell my CV1 setup, I can buy the new rift s for just a little extra fee. I think it is a better deal than a different, more expensive solution. Everyone has his own needs and expectations, I guess...

Edited March 22, 2019 by nessuno0505

[dburne]

I would not mind a little larger FOV within reason keeping performance in mind, but I care most about resolution.

[some1]

I don't know, maybe for a room scale experience a bigger fov is important, but jet pilots wear helmets IRL, and when I ride my motorbike wearing a helmet my field of view is not so much wider then the one I have using my CV1. CV1 fov has never been an issue in my experience.

 

Wider FOV in Pimax makes checking your six much easier. Also most aviation helmets don't limit your field of view.

 

I agree that as an introductory headset the Rift S should be one of the best options available. That exactly the purpose it was made.

[Fri13]

I got the feeling from all the talks, that the Rift S is a "Vive PRO". And the Rift 2 is coming sooner than expected (Sooner than the Rift S came after Rift) and that is where they are going to put their big bet.

 

Now as they said in the interview with TESTED, that their goal now is to get as many as possible to the ecosystem.

 

You can't do that with a another 999€ headset. That is impossible The Rift started to sell only after the special summer sale 449€ + shipping appeared, and then they dropped the price to it and now it is below it.

 

https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam

 

Now look at the statics from Steam, a whopping 48,2% of the VR users are using Rift. Before that 449€ special sale, Rift had 1/3 of the market, while 2/3 were Vive!

 

But notice that only a 0,49% of the Steam users are using VR.

 

The market is extremely small! You get far better profits with a gaming keyboards and mouses, displays than you do with VR!

 

So Rift S is clearly a management decision, not engineering or visionary decision. Now they need to get that 0,5% market to grow to 2% or 5% and to do that the product needs to be cheap, it needs to be easily accessible, low hardware requirements, easy to use. Take a todays normal laptop, plug one USB in, clear space, draw a guardian wall around you and start gaming.

 

And if they can get that market to increase even by a another 0.5% and they can maintain their 50% market share, they are doing very well. If they can increase it to, lets say to 60% that is even better.

 

As there will always come a new and better GPU, new ways to deal motion (AWS 2.0) and better screens and sensors etc. But not at the price that majority would be ready to pay!

 

Rift S can sound a weak, bad or old compared to some of the others challengers on the market, but Oculus is now preparing for the end game.