phew thats reassuring
thanks for finding it
occulus really could be more on the ball with answering support questions through their form
its been a day now
phew thats reassuring
thanks for finding it
occulus really could be more on the ball with answering support questions through their form
its been a day now
It sounds like you don't understand the problem. So you are resorting to taking the piss pointlessly.
They have prioritised vertical FOV rather than horizontal FOV, although our eyes have far greater horizontal FOV than vertical FOV.
That is a mistake, in my opinion. Originally, they could only get 16:10 or 16:9 screens which they had to use as a single screen for both eyes, so they had to make do with excessive vertical FOV. I've read they came up with a theory that humans need to see downwards very far or they become disorientated. This was handy as a justification for their incorrect screen FOV prioritisation (that was unavoidable at the time) but I suggest now that it has become nothing more than "conventional wisdom" and is actually a mistake. Now we are in the two screen era it is possible to align the screens optimally but sadly they chose not to do so.
You may disagree with that but don't try to pretend I'm an idiot. Eyes have greater FOV laterally than vertically and these headsets are all severely lacking in peripheral vision, even if they cost $599.
I was a motorbike rider for many years and I did not feel disorientated by the lack of downward FOV. If I had lacked peripheral vision then I would most probably be dead by now.
We are trying to deal with the dawesdust_12 problem. I don't appreciate your effort to make it worse.
I agree.
Anyway I think they chose this orientation because it is easier to fit centered in front of each eyes.
Going horizontal would obviously add fov but to my opinion it is more that they did not manage to do it properly. Eyes would not mainly look at screen center and so on. I am sure it is possible but not for this gen...
Anyway I think they chose this orientation because it is easier to fit centered in front of each eyes.
Going horizontal would obviously add fov but to my opinion it is more that they did not manage to do it properly. Eyes would not mainly look at screen center and so on. I am sure it is possible but not for this gen...
In my eyes you are a genius and a master of your craft, so that wasn't my point. My point is - let's not act like we are top class engineers, hardware manufacturers, neurologists and opticians, while people at Oculus and HTC are just a bunch of apes trying to assamble a VR Headset with ducttape from a bunch of scrap parts.
We can speculate all day long why screens are the way they are, but it won't lead us anywhere because - in the end - we don't know. Maybe higher vertical FOV helps reduce VR sicknes and while for you this may not be as important since you are quite immune to that, I'm easily geting sick in VR and it is super important for me. LFS was starting to make me sick afer a few minutes in DK2. Actually that was the biggest problem I had with both DK1 and DK2, more than FOV, SDE and resolution. But this is yet another speculation - I have no idea why they made the sceens like that - one thing I'm sure of - they had a very good reason for it.
Do you hate it when people who are completely clueless about coding and game developement come to the forums and are telling you how to develop LFS - like for example those guys who think that if you would upgrade LFS to DX12, that would instantly make the game look like Forza 6 or Project Cars. Or the guys who think it takes a month at most for one guy to develop new tyre physics.
I know you hate it, so don't try to act like them.
Secondly, none of us have tried the final Rift so we have no idea what the FOV is like on it, yet we are already talking about how low it is. I've read alot of impressions of people who DID try it and vast majority is saying that the FOV is higher than on DK2 and they didn't have any issue with it during their demo.
Some recent impressions from CES 2016 for example:
https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3zw8ta/ces_cv1_impressions_vs_vive/
https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3zwld1/ces_thoughts/cypqp74
https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3zwld1/ces_thoughts/
Was a bit drunk when I wrote that post. It appears that he made another account, wrote some posts and sent me another PM as a result. Sorry about that, will try not to mention him anymore.
They must be getting thousands of questions per hour after that preorder storm so may take a while for them to catch up with answering all that. I sent one question myself.
if they ebayed their dk1 early enough the probably actually got paid money and got a free cv1
the image makes it also look like there might be a problem with packaging the screens any closer to each other
since both the vive and the rift have standadised on the same screens and orientation im guessing theres a good technical reason for it
also good news my order now has a price to it (so they apparently looked into it and its still in their system)
still no news though
in less good news its 741 f-word in gerund form euros... theres one way to tell people f-word you for not kickstarting us ^^
It is actually quite irritating how you defend every action by Oculus as if it is beyond reason to consider they might have made any kind of mistake in anything.
In fact they have made mistakes in customer support, false minimum requirements, their store upload page with false examples, their decision to withhold the SDK from developers, false 'ballpark' price estimates and so on. Refusal to answer simple and reasonable questions from developers. Selling out to facebook is something I feel young Palmer will regret one day. I'll wait and see on that one. Maybe he really will never mind being a figurehead controlled by one of the world's most hated companies. It might work out fine for him, so as I said, I'll wait and see. Pretty strange decision, though...
They are a new company, trying to find their feet, making many mistakes. I suggest also this engineering mistake as well, not focussing on lateral FOV, while forcing us to render a very large area at the top of the screen that is invisible due to the fact that we have a brow over our eyes.
Speaking of Ebay...
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2050601.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.Xrift+cv1.TRS0&_nkw=rift+cv1&_sacat=0
I hope Oculus will cancel their orders like they did with DK2. People like these are one of the reasons why shipping date was pushed back to June within less than 24 hours.
There is a slider on the bottom of the headset that lets you adjust the IPD. It moves whole lens/screen assembly closer or further apart. Here Palmer shows how it works:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpP7E7o3ZOY
Nah, it's just a conspiracy against humanity. Don't be silly.
I'm not sure is it me defending Oculus or you attacking them. Not for us to judge, but the fact that you still insist that you would have engineered the screens better makes me think it's the latter of the two. Also, in this case I wasn't speaking defensively about Oculus but also HTC, since they use very similar screens, with same portrait orientation, resolution and refresh rate. Sony also uses 16:9 screen for Playstation VR which is roughtly the same aspect ratio.
By the way it's the optics that decide about the FOV rather than the screen, here you have 150 degree FOV out of a 16:9 screen (DK2 had 100 degree FOV at 16:9):
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/wearality/wearality-sky-limitless-vr/description
Article about it:
http://www.roadtovr.com/wearality-150-degree-lenses-are-a-balancing-act-not-a-breakthrough/
All right, you don't understand that the human eye (due to the shape of its socket) has more lateral FOV that vertical, and you don't understand that the experience in the Rift CV1 will suffer from lack of peripheral vision. You also believe that Oculus are beyond any form of criticism on any matter.
You don't even believe it's acceptable for someone to suggest or discuss the possibility that peripheral vision might be important rather than rendering useless pixels in the sky that can't be seen.
It's a pretty pointless discussion and I'm out of here before you wind me up too much.
You don't even believe it's acceptable for someone to suggest or discuss the possibility that peripheral vision might be important rather than rendering useless pixels in the sky that can't be seen.
It's a pretty pointless discussion and I'm out of here before you wind me up too much.
Calm down, the market will do the judging. And as I said in the early beginning, this whole market is way too hyped. People owning these toys already thrown it in the corner and it's eating dust now. It will kick off at some point, but not -now-. It needs another generation or two.
That was exactly my point from the beginning - there is no point discussing how bad pheripheral vision of Rift CV1 is and how it could have been avoided, if non of us actually tried it and can tell if pheripheral vision is good or bad on it.
Here is how to find out more info on your order - https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3zrnjm/get_extra_info_on_your_order/
Also this here - https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3zwhu0/order_number_to_shipping_date/
I ordered at 5:07 but had no confirmation but should be in the first batch.
I will wait to see if the vive is better and how much it is, and if I get it will sell my rift for probably a profit as it will be in short supply.
I will also sell my DK2 soon as it has gone up in price when people saw how much the CV1 rift is
Also this here - https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3zwhu0/order_number_to_shipping_date/
I ordered at 5:07 but had no confirmation but should be in the first batch.
I will wait to see if the vive is better and how much it is, and if I get it will sell my rift for probably a profit as it will be in short supply.
I will also sell my DK2 soon as it has gone up in price when people saw how much the CV1 rift is
Yeah, overvalue, it all belongs to the hype cycle. The waiting is on the first negative press reviews. This is just before the peak now.
Then the phase of 'trough of disillusionment' starts..
Then the phase of 'trough of disillusionment' starts..
Well...
according to Gartner, VR is not before the peak, instead it left the "trough of disillusionment" in 2015
Yeah VR in general. Not devices/products itself.
Dave, do you really think we are anywhere near even close to the trigger in VR? I'd say we have a way to go.
My opinion is this is the start, beginning this year. The advances will be huge and having experiences, gaming, movies on a 2d screen will seem completely boring in a few years.
I really think anyone who thinks we are at the stage of disillusionment is seriously not thinking of where we will be in 5 to 10 years time with this tech.
Quote me in a few years
My opinion is this is the start, beginning this year. The advances will be huge and having experiences, gaming, movies on a 2d screen will seem completely boring in a few years.
I really think anyone who thinks we are at the stage of disillusionment is seriously not thinking of where we will be in 5 to 10 years time with this tech.
Quote me in a few years
gosh where do u guys take that much money from D:
id need to save up for at least 4 months and i work 260H/month >_>
But i keep my hopes up for cheaper competetors.
id need to save up for at least 4 months and i work 260H/month >_>
But i keep my hopes up for cheaper competetors.
I am not throwing a GTX9xx (latest Nvidia videocard range for people who don't know it) at it to begin with. I think this will be the biggest disappointment for people. You can buy a VR device but with only buying such a thing you are not done. I think some hardware developer need to think of something to better support this VR experience. Thinking about special hardware routines like you have now for video encoding/decoding. At this stage its unsaleable to the big public because people don't have the computer system power to make it happen.
Thats exactly what I am thinking every time a new Iphone hits the streets and I see almost people fighting for that overpriced nonsense.
You should rent it out to loyal team mates
And yet our stereoscopic view is higher vertically (eyes fixed forward), the wider horizontal view is largely monoscopic. Of course when you detect something in your peripheral view you tend to turn in towards it and if the horizontal view is limited you can feel constrained. I guess it would be really hard optically to make a setup that would allow you to rotate your eyes to the extremes and still not be restricted.
The whole thing is to see in "3D" and maybe they are optimizing for that. It's still going to be a bag of compromises.
http://vision.arc.nasa.gov/personnel/al/papers/64vision/17.htm
AMA with Maximum PC Editor Jimmy Thang who got to try both Rift CV1 and Vive Pre at CES 2016:
https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/4052s0/maximum_pc_editor_jimmy_thang_here_and_ive_tried/
It's worth reading the whole thing but here is what he said about the FOV:
Vive uses circular lenses while the ones on the Rift (Crescent Bay) look more like those of that Weareality 150 degree headset. So they may be stretching the image a bit horizontaly and squeezing it verticaly.
Every pixel you put in your periheral vison is one pixel less in the center of the screen - and that's where you will be looking most of the time. We use our peripheral mostly for awarnes of our surroundings and when you see something interesting going on in your peripheral you just turn your head this way to inspect it and look at it directly. Try moving your eyes to the left as far as you can for awhile - within seconds you will start feeling discomfort and strain in your eye muscles, so most of the time we turn our head istead of our eyes to see something in our far peripheral. 2160x1200 is not much to play with - if you make the FOV very high and your peripheral vision very sharp, you will have a blury image in the center, you won't be able to read text, see in the distance and so on.
In the future when we'll have 4k+ resolution headsets it will be much easier to add some extra FOV without notably sacrificing overal image quality. Eye tracking will alow to render more pixels in the direcion your eyes are currently looking using foveated rendering - this will also reduce the load on your GPU by eliminating the need of rendering pointles pixels in the direction where you aren't looking anyway.
https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/4052s0/maximum_pc_editor_jimmy_thang_here_and_ive_tried/
It's worth reading the whole thing but here is what he said about the FOV:
Vive uses circular lenses while the ones on the Rift (Crescent Bay) look more like those of that Weareality 150 degree headset. So they may be stretching the image a bit horizontaly and squeezing it verticaly.
Every pixel you put in your periheral vison is one pixel less in the center of the screen - and that's where you will be looking most of the time. We use our peripheral mostly for awarnes of our surroundings and when you see something interesting going on in your peripheral you just turn your head this way to inspect it and look at it directly. Try moving your eyes to the left as far as you can for awhile - within seconds you will start feeling discomfort and strain in your eye muscles, so most of the time we turn our head istead of our eyes to see something in our far peripheral. 2160x1200 is not much to play with - if you make the FOV very high and your peripheral vision very sharp, you will have a blury image in the center, you won't be able to read text, see in the distance and so on.
In the future when we'll have 4k+ resolution headsets it will be much easier to add some extra FOV without notably sacrificing overal image quality. Eye tracking will alow to render more pixels in the direcion your eyes are currently looking using foveated rendering - this will also reduce the load on your GPU by eliminating the need of rendering pointles pixels in the direction where you aren't looking anyway.
Palmer did another AMA on Reddit today:
https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/40ea0x/i_am_palmer_luckey_founder_of_oculus_and_designer/
Good to hear that. Not really comfortable with the fact that my order was pushed to May thanks to PayPal.
https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/40ea0x/i_am_palmer_luckey_founder_of_oculus_and_designer/
Good to hear that. Not really comfortable with the fact that my order was pushed to May thanks to PayPal.
List of the games which will be available at the Oculus Store on the launch day, along with the prices and comfort rating (+ some upcomming titles):
https://www.oculus.com/en-us/blog/introducing-30-games-coming-to-oculus-on-march-28/
No LFS
During the Epic Games press conference at GDC they've also announced that Oculus Rift SDK 1.3 will be realeased on the launch day.
https://www.oculus.com/en-us/blog/introducing-30-games-coming-to-oculus-on-march-28/
No LFS
During the Epic Games press conference at GDC they've also announced that Oculus Rift SDK 1.3 will be realeased on the launch day.
Sad to see that LFS is missing from the list, it would deserve a place there.
They've started shipping (not to me - thanks PayPal), so make sure you have enough cash on your Credit Card or PayPal.
EDIT:
https://twitter.com/brendaniribe/status/713118956135981056
EDIT:
https://twitter.com/brendaniribe/status/713118956135981056
Oculus Rift pre-orders open at 4pm GMT / UTC today
(120 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG