Personal View site logo
Oculus - one big disfunctional company
  • Same shit design, usage of Samsung phone screen.

    Now just added more white parts for tracking and cheap headphones.

    image

  • 27 Replies sorted by
  • Headphones might be cheap. But otherwise I think it's great. Are you comparing it to some competitor or don't you just like virtual reality?

  • But otherwise I think it's great. Are you comparing it to some competitor or don't you just like virtual reality?

    It is horrible. As proper glasses require custom produced smaller screens and optics. Must be very light in front.

    Oculus is just complete fuck up.

  • Lol. First company that produces glasses that actually work, and you just find bad things about them :)

  • First company that produces glasses that actually work, and you just find bad things about them :)

    It is not true that it is "first company that produces glasses that actually work".

    It WAS first company that want to make high margin virtual reality glasses based on wrong technologies (again, to keep margins!).

  • I recently tried the Oculus DK2 with some demonstration software. It's a nice "immersion" effect, and the head tracking works quite well. I don't think the weight of the thing will be a show-stopper, it wasn't disturbing me.

    But there were other things that I didn't like about the DK2:

    • Still way too little resolution - looks like some 1990's video game
    • If it's somewhat warm outside, it gets annoyingly warm inside the mask
    • Tracking only the position of the head, but not anything else, does not allow for realistic "immersion" of any other body movement, and "moving around" feels just strange (and makes some people nauseous, quickly)

    Anyway, Oculus is not a company of its own anymore, and Facebook will sure present us with something like "Second Life"+"Farmville" in "VR", plastered with advertisements and "paid content". Not something I'd be interested in.

  • I don't think the weight of the thing will be a show-stopper, it wasn't disturbing me.

    How long you used it?

  • I used it for ~45 minutes. In comparison to the DK2, a military helmet or night vision gear is much more heavy and annoying. But the latter are both not "occluding" the face as much with regards to heat/perspiration, and that I did find annoying.

  • At SIGGRAPH 2014, they were giving out these free VR kits:

    https://cardboard.withgoogle.com/

  • At SIGGRAPH 2014, they were giving out these free VR kits:

    This is even worse :-)

  • In their keynotes at Oculus Connect, the brains behind Oculus kept talking about “presence”—what it takes to create total immersion in virtual reality. It sounded like a buzzword to me, until I strapped Crescent Bay onto my face, placed its integrated earpieces over my ears, and stood on the ledge of a skyscraper looking out over a virtual steampunk cityscape. I looked down, tried to step off the ledge, and my body recoiled. I was there.

    http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/09/21/oculus-rift-crescent-bay-prototype-hands-on-experiencing-true-vr-presence-for-the-first-time/

    Oculus has unprecedented media coverage from the start, especially for such manager style idea (get smartphone screen, produce cheap lenses and plastic case and throw it all into user). Technology is not really ready for this, unfortunately.

  • http://gizmodo.com/the-new-oculus-rift-prototype-is-called-crescent-bay-1637185263

    While Oculus says it's still designed to be a seated experience, the prototypes I tried were way lighter and way more comfortable than even the DK2, and it really feels fantastic to walk around a small area. I barely noticed them on my head unless or until I got tangled in the cable while walking. The resolution is noticibly better than even the Samsung Gear VR, and between that screen and the new lenses the effect is phenomenal. I still saw pixels if I looked hard, but I quickly forgot I had a screen in front of my face. That's something that I've never quite experienced with any previous VR headset.

    User experiences sounds really amazing. Cannot wait until I can try the final consumer version.

  • Similar criticisms were made regarding the first generation portable PC / digital camera / cellphone / television, too.

    I remember the year of SIGGRAPH when MOCAP was new and all the rage; everywhere you looked, there were people wearing tights covered in bubble sensors... and also people saying "MOCAP sucks, and will never work for proper 3D animation."

  • As someone that's actually been into the Oculus office, witnessed builds, and shot/Colored footage for promos, I don't even understand this thread.

    =T

  • As someone that's actually been into the Oculus office, witnessed builds, and shot/Colored footage for promos, I don't even understand this thread.

    Of course you don't :-) You want to get another order from them :-)

    @kholi

    Specially for you, I am very long time VR fan. Checked many products personally and know many designs. Yet all this Oculus thing is just wrong, spending time in the wrong direction, making good engineers implement bank manager ideas.

  • Btw and this is their optics

    image

    aaset13.jpg
    636 x 367 - 48K
  • @kholi Another Oculus fan. Very cool

    Fwiw, the headphones are anything but poor quality. They are the exact same drivers as the Portapros, which paired with a good EQ and amp can match the very best (Oculus has integrated a dac and eq to achieve consistent performance and calibrated quality). I have Portapros with me (my fav), along with two Oculus hmds

    The future is looking bright for virtual reality, as they've managed top quality VR at a low price point (partly thanks to the innovation that Carmack brought to the table of using a simple geometry distortion adjustment on the GPU to allow optics that are not astronomically expensive, yet achieve comparable performance)

  • partly thanks to the innovation that Carmack brought to the table of using a simple geometry distortion adjustment on the GPU to allow optics that are not astronomically expensive, yet achieve comparable performance

    Well, if you even check the NVidia data, picture is rendered non distorted and after this made distorted (unfortunately it does not work fast enough on current GPU, so even on 980 Ti they want to improve speed by reducing rendering resolution in non center areas).

    I also think that you fully misunderstand the idea. None of this companies are making best VR for you. Quite the contrary. Their idea is to make big marginal product. And big margin product requires cheap mass produced components, even if they are not right for the task.

    Proper design require smaller high res OLED panels, individual to each eye (so you could also have more adjustments and much better actual resolution) and with very good optics.

  • That distortion post processing actually has a very small gpu cost (it happens to the rendered buffer as a post process); however, VR is not yet fully optimized in many ways, which the GPU companies are racing to address. There is a big performance hit due to a lack of optimization of stereo and latency prioritized over detail. What Amd and Nvidia have done so far is very promising.

    The newest hmds (Oculus and HTC) now use custom vr screens that are the best possible at the moment, one for each eye. The Cv1 will have global refresh oleds at 90fps. They could use a higher resolution, but that will come in time.

    The components they have used have allowed the hmds at my side to be a reality at last. The genius of Oculus is that they didn't pursue custom VR components at exponential cost, but off-the-shelf parts to reach consumer scale potential. And they checked all they key perceptual boxes that not even the most expensive HMDs were getting right. While the developer kits are sold at a mark up, the consumer versions will be sold at or near cost to drive adoption of what is a niche technology. VR is so different from any other consumer product; the general public will take time to acclimate

  • The newest hmds (Oculus and HTC) now use custom vr screens that are the best possible at the moment, one for each eye. The Cv1 will have global refresh oleds at 90fps. They could use a higher resolution, but that will come in time.

    Any links to disassembling? As DK2 used screen from Samsung.

    The genius of Oculus is that they didn't pursue custom VR components at exponential cost, but off-the-shelf parts to reach consumer scale potential. And they checked all they key perceptual boxes that not even the most expensive HMDs were getting right. While the developer kits are sold at a mark up, the consumer versions will be sold at or near cost to drive adoption of what is a niche technology. VR is so different from any other consumer product; the general public will take time to acclimate

    You so idealistic. People in the industry I talked told that tech is not ready yet, and that design Oculus is using is not good one (and they know it in professionals talk). Whole point of design was to get maximum margin.

    the consumer versions will be sold at or near cost to drive adoption of what is a niche technology.

    Please provide me any mass examples of such strategy used (of course providing real manufacturing cost and sale price).

  • Presentation was horribly geeky mess, with wrong approach, partnership with Microsoft (for gamepad? really?) and with wrong release dates.

  • StarVR

    The headset also boasts two 5.5-inch Quad HD (2560x1440) displays, coupled with a fresnel lens design to give players an immersive VR experience.

    This looks much more serious than Oculus.

  • image

    img339.jpg
    466 x 317 - 44K
  • I have no idea what content is playing in those goggles to create that response! We have mainly VR crowd scenes of random people, and horror 'experiences', oh and there is that space girl VR...

  • @alcomposer

    VR porno? very popular thing.