Varjo Review

[Mars Exulte]

 

  This is pretty exotic, and appropriately priced. I didn't see this video already posted at a glance, so here it is. His descriptions are very interesting. Price aside, the bigger issue is powering the bloody thing, as usual. It'll likely still be a generation or two before GPUs can reasonably drive it.

[WelshZeCorgi]

Just as well, gives us time to save up a few thousand dollars for the necessary upgrades + VR headset.  

 

I'd also wait for a near natural FOV along with the current Near natural resolution. 

 

Also also, sounds like there are a number of issues they got to iron out, + DCS doesn't seem to support certain features on the XR3. (eye tracking)

Edited September 29, 2021 by WelshZeCorgi

[Mars Exulte]

The XR3 is for augmented reality, for the most part. For DCS the VR3 (same thing sans the external cameras and related stuff) is probably the better choice. More ''built to purpose''.

 

Unless you have a scale pit, I suppose.

 

The eye tracking should all be internal. It's not Tobii. It's the headset tracking your eyes and adjusting res on the fly, the game shouldn't have anything to do with it. This is ultimately the key to decent VR performance, not rendering the full screen at full res when you're only looking at a small part. Traditional rendering is EXTREMELY wasteful. Your eyes work the same way (dense in the center, less at the edges).

Edited September 29, 2021 by Mars Exulte

[WelshZeCorgi]

Even if you don't have a scale pit, I'd image it would still be useful. As you can see your keyboard, real kneeboard and your HOTAS controls. 

 

But I wonder if it really would develop in a few generations. VR is already so niche, that's why this is marketed towards companies. Unless they see a large amount of individuals buying these VR and XR headsets, I feel like it's unlikely they'll develop one for the home market. 

[GunSlingerAUS]

Gotta say this is a very exciting evolution of VR technology. I'm tempted to splash out, but know that we'll see similar tech used in consumer-priced HMDs in the next couple of years. 

 

Imagine if we could have this kind of clarity, with a larger FOV, AND DCS fps equal to the HMD's refresh rate? I reckon that's doable within the next decade. 

[Mars Exulte]

16 hours ago, WelshZeCorgi said:

I feel like it's unlikely they'll develop one for the home market. 

  The $3500 one IS for the home market. People spend that much on big TVs or stereo systems on the reg. This is cutting edge VR tech. It ain't gonna be cheap.

 

  That said, what's cutting edge today is old hat tomorrow. VR is what's driving a lot of the development of these new technologies and bringing them forward. The more developed it becomes, the more utilities discovered for the concepts, the more it's used and the cheaper it becomes.

 

7 hours ago, GunSlingerAUS said:

Gotta say this is a very exciting evolution of VR technology. I'm tempted to splash out, but know that we'll see similar tech used in consumer-priced HMDs in the next couple of years. 

  Yeah, I wouldn't rush out and dump thousands on this just yet. We are indeed teetering on the edge of some major breakthroughs. We're coming out of the ''proof of concept'' stage and entering the ''refined mass production'' stage.

 

 

 

 

  VR is only niche because of its newness and the unholy system requirements and limited software/gaming. Those requirements are rapidly dwindling, and it is becoming increasingly widespread and popular with an ever growing library of games and utilities. This isn't the Nintendo powerglove. It's not going anywhere and in ten years you'll have an entire generation raised on the things.

 

[SharpeXB]

17 hours ago, GunSlingerAUS said:

Imagine if we could have this kind of clarity, with a larger FOV, AND DCS fps equal to the HMD's refresh rate? I reckon that's doable within the next decade. 

Hate to burst the bubble but this will never happen. It will always be more demanding to run a game in 3D than in 2D. And games will always continue to evolve and push the limits of hardware. Unless DCS somehow froze its development in 2021 while hardware continues to evolve. Which isn’t realistic to expect. The only games which will be capable of running well in VR are ones which are designed specifically for it, meaning with inherently lower graphics demands. 

9 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

and it is becoming increasingly widespread and popular with an ever growing library of games and utilities

But it’s not. VR has been frozen in adoption at about 2% in games and 11-12% in flight sims. Those numbers haven’t budged since it’s introduction. 

9 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

This isn't the Nintendo powerglove

But it’s exactly that. It’s a peripheral. Just like a Kinect or a add-on disc player. If you were a gaming executive or developer that’s exactly how you’d see it. The PSVR has an attach rate of about 5%. That doesn’t bode well for Sony to consider making VR games. 

[SharpeXB]

9 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

People spend that much on big TVs or stereo systems on the reg

But see again, it’s a peripheral. It’s not the TV it’s like the DVD player. People might spend $3k on the TV but not a device to connect to it. A gaming peripheral is akin to a joystick etc. it needs to be in the realm of $200-$300

[FoxTwo]

9 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

The $3500 one IS for the home market. People spend that much on big TVs or stereo systems on the reg. This is cutting edge VR tech. It ain't gonna be cheap.

 

Not with an $800 annual subscription fee it ain't.

[Mars Exulte]

15 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Hate to burst the bubble but this will never happen. It will always be more demanding to run a game in 3D than in 2D.

  The margin between the two will narrow until it eventually becomes irrelevant. 4k is more demanding than 1080, but cards are powerful enough now to run it fine and in another gen or so the difference will become irrelevant, just like 1080 compared to prior generations. And again, with more advanced rendering methods (like the above example of eye tracking and adaptive rendering) this will narrow further or disappear altogether into irrelevance. You're literally ignoring technology, in the video, that is actively working toward that very goal.

 

15 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

And games will always continue to evolve and push the limits of hardware. Unless DCS somehow froze its development in 2021 while hardware continues to evolve. Which isn’t realistic to expect. The only games which will be capable of running well in VR are ones which are designed specifically for it, meaning with inherently lower graphics demands.

  See above.

 

15 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

But it’s not. VR has been frozen in adoption at about 2% in games and 11-12% in flight sims. Those numbers haven’t budged since it’s introduction.

  Which was like 5 years ago with the very first garbage headset. The first semi-decent headsets didn't start arriving until about 2 years ago. The first actually good ones are either just arriving or due for launch still.

 

  Shockingly, the general public is not interested in rushing out to buy brand new proof of concept prototypes. The whole thing is still very new. If it was a dead end, people wouldn't be flushing vast amounts of money into developing it into usable forms.

 

15 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

But it’s exactly that. It’s a peripheral.

  It's a peripheral, yes. It is not a cheap gimmick like the powerglove, so no, it is not ''exactly that''.

 

18 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

But see again, it’s a peripheral. It’s not the TV it’s like the DVD player. People might spend $3k on the TV but not a device to connect to it.

  You mean like $400-600 gaming console? Or a $1000+ stereo system? It is not ''like a DVD player'', it is a considerably more important device than that, literally it's a screen/monitor/TV only attached on your face.

 

18 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

A gaming peripheral is akin to a joystick etc. it needs to be in the realm of $200-$300

  Gaming peripherals to the general public are $40 gamepads. The Rift S IS about $300. It's also a mediocre device. That option literally already exists. Shitty headsets will likely continue to be available for the forseeable future. Decent ones will continue to be more expensive... just like GASP decent joysticks (Warthog $400-500 HOTAS, VKB $500 stick and base, etc).

 

18 minutes ago, FoxTwo said:

Not with an $800 annual subscription fee it ain't.

  Which puts it just above Spotify and Netflix in my monthly bills but a bit below my internet and WAY below my phone bill, credit cards, etc. Oh dear, THE HORROR!

[FoxTwo]

31 minutes ago, Mars Exulte said:

Which puts it just above Spotify and Netflix in my monthly bills but a bit below my internet and WAY below my phone bill, credit cards, etc. Oh dear, THE HORROR!

 

I don't simp for corporations so the thought of paying an annual fee to use something I've already paid $3000+ for is a little abhorrent to me but I guess to each his own.

[The LT]

  Which puts it just above Spotify and Netflix in my monthly bills but a bit below my internet and WAY below my phone bill, credit cards, etc. Oh dear, THE HORROR!

Don't try to downplay that monthly fee. It is outrageous and unprecedented. What is ok for corporate world is not so for the hobby/consumer segment.

[SharpeXB]

36 minutes ago, Mars Exulte said:

The margin between the two will narrow until it eventually becomes irrelevant

Have game graphics ever stopped improving and matching hardware capabilities? No. 
There is actually a limit to how good graphics can get though, they can only improve to the point where they look and behave completely real. Going beyond reality isn’t possible. But that limit is a long long way off. 

40 minutes ago, Mars Exulte said:

The whole thing is still very new. If it was a dead end, people wouldn't be flushing vast amounts of money into developing it into usable forms.

But it’s not new. VR has been around in one form or another for decades. And people aren’t spending vast amounts of money on it. Less than 2% of PC gamers own a VR headset and a similar number of console players; 5% of Sony and zero % of Microsoft. 

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, Mars Exulte said:

It's a peripheral, yes.

Ok the only VR headset which is actually not a peripheral is the Quest 2 since it can play games without a PC or console attached. 

[The LT]

Ok the only VR headset which is actually not a peripheral is the Quest 2 since it can play games without a PC or console attached. 

What about the Vive Focus?

[SharpeXB]

17 minutes ago, The LT said:

19 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Ok the only VR headset which is actually not a peripheral is the Quest 2 since it can play games without a PC or console attached. 

What about the Vive Focus?

Not heard of it. If it’s the same as a Quest 2? Sure. But the rest are in the same category as the Kinect, the Power Glove and the PlayStation Move.

[The LT]

Not heard of it. If it’s the same as a Quest 2? Sure. But the rest are in the same category as the Kinect, the Power Glove and the PlayStation Move.

Agree. But it seems VR in general is moving from the PC tethered to the standalone with PC as an option.

[SharpeXB]

8 minutes ago, The LT said:

10 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Not heard of it. If it’s the same as a Quest 2? Sure. But the rest are in the same category as the Kinect, the Power Glove and the PlayStation Move.

Agree. But it seems VR in general is moving from the PC tethered to the standalone with PC as an option.

True, the Quest 2 if I recall accounts for 50% of HMD sales. 
As peripherals VR headsets are not selling. Realize the PlayStation Move wasn’t considered successful and yet has sold 15 million units. The Kinect was discontinued after selling 35 million. The PSVR has only sold 5 million, just an attach rate of 1 for every 20 PlayStations

Edited October 1, 2021 by SharpeXB

[L0ngbow]

Steam doesnt apply barrel correction for these headsets. At 100%, its running around 2880x2720, so it's not hard to drive. I get around 70 fps with it and the clarity is amazing.

[Mars Exulte]

11 hours ago, FoxTwo said:

I don't simp for corporations so the thought of paying an annual fee to use something I've already paid $3000+ for is a little abhorrent to me but I guess to each his own.

11 hours ago, The LT said:

Don't try to downplay that monthly fee. It is outrageous and unprecedented. What is ok for corporate world is not so for the hobby/consumer segment.

    I know how people around here feel about subscriptions, but that is not Walmart grade, either. There's nothing ''unprecedented'' about paying a monthly fee, though, including in the ''hobby'' segment. I pay a monthly fee for access to the gliders I fly as a hobby on top of rental and hourly, my dad pays monthly fee for access to land to fly RC planes, my brother pays a monthly fee to go to a shooting club's land, and we've ALL payed monthly fees to play video games up until the ''free to play but isn't'' rage kicked off. A lot of software people use on the reg is subscription based, too. Hobbies routinely go that route if they lack the sheer volume necessary to drive profits. So, no. Not ''unprecedented''.

 

  It is HIGH and no I don't think it's a good buy for now with more appropriate solutions almost definitely on the way, but it's not THAT far out there.

 

11 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

But it’s not new. VR has been around in one form or another for decades.

  No, it has NOT existed in an usable form until recently, pretending otherwise is nonsense. You did not have passable resolutions, you did not have proper interaction, you did not have proper tracking, and you did not have acceptable form factor.

 

11 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

And people aren’t spending vast amounts of money on it.

  As I described in detail previously, it IS new, it is demanding, it is not plug n play, and it is not where it needs to be yet. I'm sure you know better than the people pooring literally billions into development though Truly a dead end in the eyes of everyone.

[SharpeXB]

38 minutes ago, Mars Exulte said:

No, it has NOT existed in an usable form until recently, pretending otherwise is nonsense. You did not have passable resolutions, you did not have proper interaction, you did not have proper tracking, and you did not have acceptable form factor.

I think what we are looking at today is essentially the “Motorola Brick” version of an HMD. It hasn’t reached “iPhone” yet. And the form factor is still way too expensive heavy and clunky and difficult appeal to the average consumer. 

41 minutes ago, Mars Exulte said:

As I described in detail previously, it IS new, it is demanding, it is not plug n play, and it is not where it needs to be yet. I'm sure you know better than the people pooring literally billions into development though Truly a dead end in the eyes of everyone.

Remember we’re interested in VR gaming here. The Varjo isn’t directed at gamers. The gaming segment of VR is stalled in a chicken/egg state. People aren’t going to buy a $3,000 headset to play Beat Saber. 

[MAXsenna]

  No, it has NOT existed in an usable form until recently, pretending otherwise is nonsense. You did not have passable resolutions, you did not have proper interaction, you did not have proper tracking, and you did not have acceptable form factor.

I strongly disagree. Have a look at my avatar. Don't remember the price, but it was like 500-600 USD IIRC in the mid 90s.
No inside/outside tracking. It used the Earth's magnetic field. Only 3DoF though.
The "puck" (mouse) that came with it used the same tracking and was awesome in FPSs. It was very comfortable to wear, with large audio drivers and you cool easily "lift" the display. It had native support in DID's EF2000, Under a Killing Moon and Duke Nukem 3D was very scary.
The "FOV" was natively 640x480 with absolutely no performance impact compared to non stereoscopic/flat screen.
The screen door effect was horrific though.
Too bad VR at the time dwindled and died. If it hadn't, we'd probably not having this discussion and everyone would have VR.
Cheers!

PS: I feel sorry for your phone bill. For me family Spotify, 365, cell (3GB free calls/SMS/MMS in the Nordics), Internet and Prime is less than USD 100 a month.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[SharpeXB]

On 9/29/2021 at 4:15 PM, Mars Exulte said:

The eye tracking should all be internal. It's not Tobii. It's the headset tracking your eyes and adjusting res on the fly

From what I see it doesn’t appear that the Varjo does this, ie “foveated rendering” which would use eye tracking to dynamically locate the high res picture. It does have eye tracking but that’s used for other purposes. For its resolution it’s just equipped with two fixed screens, each at different resolutions, the higher one in the center of your vision. But that doesn’t move with your eyes, it stays fixed, producing so called “fixed foveated rendering”

[dburne]

Always interesting to read comments on VR by users who - don't use VR.

[SharpeXB]

I’ve used VR headsets at work. I know what they’re like. And I can’t see the company spending that much on one either. And the subscription? What does that get you, tech support? Covid has also ended the idea of sharing these too, ah the innocent days of 2019 passing the Oculus around for everyone to use. That ain’t happening anymore.