KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
The controllers
Winner: HTC Vive
This one isn't even a competition. With the HTC Vive right now I can use any of the console gamepads, a Steam controller or most likely, the wand motion controllers it comes with. They aren't perfect, but right now they offer the best, haptic-feedback providing, multiple input controllers available for virtual reality.
With a wand controller you can have your hands, or some semblance of them in the game with you. This is not only good for more detailed interaction, but it makes VR more intuitive for first time users. Every non-gamer I've handed the wand controllers to has picked up how to use them in minutes. The same cannot be said for an Xbox gamepad.
Vive controllers mean you can dual wield realistic feeling guns in VR
And unfortunately until Touch comes out at some vague date before the end of the year, that's all the Oculus Rift has. Granted it has its remote control too, which is fine for Farlands and similarly light experiences, but for active gaming you need more.
For certain experiences too, like TiltBrush, Hover Junkers or in-fact any shooting game whatsoever, motion controllers are a downright necessity and without them the Oculus Rift feels entirely incomplete.
Tracking
Winner: HTC Vive
Big strides have been made between the days of the Oculus Rift DK2 and the CV1 in terms of tracking. The latest IR camera is more capable, has a wider field of view and does allow for some movement beyond the bounds of what's in-front of you. But as it stands it doesn't hold a candle to the Vive's tracking system.
The Lighthouse sensors can track a user more effectively across the vertical and horizontal axis. Unless you are placing your Constellation camera up high, you are going to find it hard to get close to the floor with the Rift. Likewise turning around and looking down almost always wrecks tracking.
Although the Vive's laser trackers aren't perfect and there are still issues with it losing track of you at times, with proper set up this is incredibly rare. The same goes for the motion controllers, which are easily tracked in spaces of various sizes.
Most importantly though, all of this comes together to allow you to walk around your roomscale space safely (thanks Chaperone!) with the Vive, which you cannot do in the Rift. Yes you can step out of the bounds immediately around your chair or standing position, but with imperfect roomscale tracking and a lack of Chaperone to guide you, it is not comfortable, nor safe to walk around blind.
This may improve when Touch is released, which will bring with it a second tracking camera, but without Chaperone I don't see it being as capable or as comfortable as the Vive. On top of that Oculus has driven development based around seated and standing experiences, which means most roomscale set ups are not going to be as well supported officially as they are on the Vive.
Much like the controllers, the lack of roomscale tracking makes the Oculus Rift feel like a last generation headset. It is simply not as complete a package as the Vive.
No. I do not accept 110 degree field of view. You have to try harder Valve to impress me – I need EQUAL or better specs to StarVR on the Vive 2 or id better go and get a StarVR as soon as it’s out. StarVR + Star Citizen = gaming dream of Ultra Wide Quad HD (5120×1440) at 120Hz and 210 degree FOV.
Forget StarVR. I want HappyPonyVR, which is coming out with 280 degree field of view and 9260×3840 resolution at 120 Hz.
What’s that you say? HappyPonyVR doesn’t exist and can’t be bought yet and so is not even remotely a valid comparison against existing in-the-store VR headsets?
Yeah, same for StarVR.
Actually the correct answer is C- *if you are poor like me* wait until these only cost 199$ in 5 years or so, have tons of games, GOOD GAMES, and all the kinks worked out.
If you are rich then who cares. Buy Vive for now, then StarVR later. Can’t afford to do that? Then you probably shouldn’t be buying VR right now anyways. Pay your bills! RENT IS DUE and your landlord is pissed, and here you are playing with toys that cost a fortune! Have a nice day!
Almost nobody living in a modern economy can’t afford a Vive if they want one. It’s just a matter of choosing how you distribute your disposable income. You can use the same old cellphone for another 2 years instead of upgrading now, and you’ll have the money you need for a Vive. Or maybe use that 47 inch TV for a while longer, holding off on that 60 inch TV purchase. Or you could forego custom designer coffee for a couple months. Etc.
I’ve learned from reading many posts from Vive owners on Reddit over the last several months that it’s a big mistake to claim any head-mounted display fits “you” well or badly when you really mean that it fits “me” well or badly. Everyone’s head is different and so far, there’s no “one size fits all.”
To bad the Vive is so much more expensive though. And I really don’t care about the room tracking. I’ll stay in my chair tyvm.
are you a 20 something with no kids?
And what kind of video card are you going to be using without it running like total dogshit?
Room tracking is where its at. Im playing a few sitdown games like Project Cars and Total War, but they dont compare to the excitement of room scale games. they are incredible.
No, and I fail to see the relevance of your question.
I am aiming for a Vega 11, but who knows, i might go for a 1080Ti and wait for StarVR to launch, then get another for SLI when StarVR launches. It depends – If I find a video card that would do me a 120FPS minimum on a 2560x1440p monitor then im set to get another one and do 5120x1440p at 120FPS. Though unfortunately, no card can reach this high frame rate even at 1440p, which is a shame, Nvidia and AMD should make bigger chips and put more CUs in there, then STOP caring about TDP and go for 300-500W cards. Electricity is cheap enough nowadays…
$900 is a lot to spend on a luxury item when you have a family. Even if you can “afford it,” The money can go elsewhere to more important things — especially if you have kids. Your assumption is broad, and not accurate for a lot of people. It really sounds like the opinion of a 20 something who has yet to face a lot of life challenges. I say that not to offend you, but rather point out that you are generalizing and have formed some misconceptions about wealth and money management.
I’m fairly certain that every family I know spends thousands of dollars per year on entertainment and electronics already. Of course not every family would put the purchase of a Vive before other discretionary spending, because they value other things (big screen TVs, new cell phones, etc) more. But if they want to prioritize the Vive, I think most families could do so by cutting out other discretionary spending.
$800 is $67 per month over the course of a year. I would suspect that the vast majority of families could afford that by minorly rebudgeting some other discretionary spending.
My point is not to dispute the “if you’re poor like me” part of the original poster’s comment … if you are truly poor, and as a result have no cell phone, no TV, no car, no form of discretionary spending that you can rebudget for a Vive, then certainly you can’t get a Vive.
My point was simply to dispute the second half of the post, which was the “if you’re rich then who cares” part. You don’t HAVE to be rich to afford a Vive.
There is a wide range of income levels between “rich” and “poor” and most of those would find a Vive a perfectly acceptable level of expense if they are willing to buy it instead of spending discretionary money elsewhere.
That’s really the only point I’m trying to make.
My question with ALL VR headsets is, how do they handle peripheral vision?
I think that you, by thinking Bryan has failed to see the bigger picture and that families have more expenditures typically than singles, have actually failed to understand that your familial experience is a sample size of 1, and says nothing about other families.
The range of incomes for single people is just as broad as the range of incomes for families. There are families who couldn’t dream of buying a VR headset right now, just like there are single people who don’t make enough to even think about the purchase. Then there are both who could afford it with some rebudgeting. Finally, there are both single people and families for whom the purchase of a VR headset would be a drop in the bucket.
For instance, me. I have a couple of girls and a wife. We both make a decent salary. She lets me game a couple hours in the evening as long as I either cook dinner and clean up, or watch and play with the girls while she cooks dinner. I purchased a Vive a little bit ago. It was no big deal. It’s a hobby of mine, among others. She has hobbies, and she spends what she wants to on them as well. Yet I have friends with no kids, no mortgage, no car payment (driving older cars which are paid off), who couldn’t even afford to purchase a computer capable of running VR, let alone the VR headset. All of this is to say, your comment missed the point a lot more than the comment you were replying to.
That’s an assumption. I professionally analyze demographic data for the media industry. I’m not a parent. I’m basing my response on very real, measured science of what people spend money on.