$399 Oculus Quest Offers Premium Standalone VR

Dyseman

Distinguished
Feb 8, 2009
137
0
18,680
0
So, they are going away from PC driven super graphics and settling for Cellphone or Pi tech? I'd rather be tethered.

Sure, things like Beat Saber can be done on a lesser GPU/CPU but wouldn't we be going backwards? Roborecall would have to be scaled back.
 

Specter0420

Distinguished
Apr 8, 2010
97
11
18,635
0
"Zuckerberg declared the end of Oculus' first-generation of VR headsets."
"launch with Oculus Rift-level graphics"

So what is he calling this then? Generation 1.1?
 

ikaz

Distinguished
Dec 27, 2005
2,194
0
20,460
232
Why don't they offer a pass through mode on the quest ? That would make it more appealing that way you could have game/apps but have a tether option to your PC to play more demanding games. Not sure what the specs are on the quest but I'm a mid tear PC could push better frame rates than a mobile processor. That would at least get my attention.
 

Yeah, that's something I would like to see in a VR headset. Being able to take it wherever you want, but also being able to run it tethered for experiences with more advanced visuals. I mean, why not? I doubt it would add much to the cost of one of these standalone headsets. Perhaps they figure that if you are limited to the onboard hardware, you'll be more inclined to upgrade to a new headset in a few years once the next generation of standalone VR games requires more processing power than what the headset can provide. It's probably also easier to keep people locked into your own ecosystem on a standalone device.
 

ikaz

Distinguished
Dec 27, 2005
2,194
0
20,460
232
Yeah it probably make more money not offering that but as far as I recall they aren't on top any more as far as VR goes I believe the HTC is currently. However if they had some sort of pass through cable attachment even if it was say and extra $30 I think that could set them apart. They could even have done some sort of per-order bonus. I think that would help with word of mouth so you can get more "causal" player and those that have mid tier PC that may want to get into VR but afraid their rig can't handle it. They would at least be able to play games that are optimized for the total mobile experience. Then again that could just be me I have an I5 8400 and 1070 gtx I should be able to run most VR games but it's more a curiosity and don't want to spend that cash then find out the games I want to play on PC in VR just aren't up to par with my setup.
 

cerealkeller

Distinguished
Jul 30, 2009
23
3
18,525
1
Damnit, I was hoping for a VR headset with higher resolution. I love the Rift, but it needs a wider field of view and a much higher resolution. I can get pretty damn nice looking graphics on the Rift using super sampling. But it's still blurry some times. Goddamn, Fallout 4 and Skyrim are epic in VR!!
 

Rexer

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2013
637
4
19,215
64
I like the graphics on my 144 monitor mucho plenty. I think I'll strap it to my head. I may have to get a robot dog to replace 'mindtrick'. I hate for him to be neglected while I play games.
 

Specter0420

Distinguished
Apr 8, 2010
97
11
18,635
0
Without a pass-through for PC they are really cutting out a sizable segment of enthusiasts that are willing to spend big money on their setups; Simulator people. We have expensive Rudder pedals, car pedals, HOTAS, steering wheels, etc. How do I plug those into this?
 

fireaza

Distinguished
May 9, 2011
176
3
18,685
0

Uh, ever since they launched..? Not sure if you've noticed, but the headsets don't cost $600 now. They've also been improving the quality of the headsets and controllers too. Are you expecting them to be free or something?
 

bit_user

Splendid
Ambassador

For those people, I'm sure Rift 2.0 is on its way.

This is a fundamentally different device, aimed at fundamentally different kinds of experiences. Multi-user, same-room could be the most exciting capability unlocked by standalone 6-DoF devices.
 

Sakkura

Illustrious


No. They are offering different things for different people. They were specifically talking about this in the keynote. They're still going to have PC-based VR going forward, ie. a Rift 2 will come at some point.



Pretty much the same thing except hugely upgraded with positional tracking? It completely transforms the experiences the headset is capable of. It's also higher res and has much better controllers, plus upgraded internal hardware (better SOC and so on).



What they said was this completed their first-gen lineup, with a cheap standalone headset for media consumption (Oculus Go), a high-end headset for PC (Oculus Rift), and an in-between standalone headset for gaming (Oculus Quest).



You can't just "pass through" like it's no big deal. It takes a cutting-edge wireless connection, which adds a lot of cost, requires you to plug an adapter of some sort into the PC, and also adds weight on the headset and drains the battery much faster. It's much better to have a separate headset for PC gamers, and then optimize the standalone headset for actual standalone use.



This has the same high resolution as the HTC Vive Pro.
 
Sep 1, 2018
28
0
30
0
High res technology is already here. I've demoed Varjo Tech headset at our development lab in Finland. Amazing, super sharp, no SDE fluent 3D experience. Just FOV isn't wide enough yet. It could easily be implemented for high end PC. Powered by GPU with less cuda cores than RTX 2080TI. Nothing revolutional, only 4 display panels (2 per eye), Tobii eye tracking and some undisclosed algos that enable dynamic foveated rendering. If mass produced, prices could be around 1K, I guess. We paid around 10K for it, but these things are basically in beta state and not produced on mass scale. If some few men band Varjo can do it, FB could easily produce it on massive scale to lower prices and drop our jaws. But they won't do it, cause they can milk us for the next 5 or more years with low tech high margin garbage before competition forces them to offer more. Sadly.
 

ikaz

Distinguished
Dec 27, 2005
2,194
0
20,460
232
Well yes I know it would probably take a special adapter it just as far as I know no one else offers. Even if they would have to charge $50+ for cables it would add potential customers. At this point it seems some one is looking to get a serious VR setup they are looking at the Vive, while Oculus seems to be seen as a more causal VR user and cheaper choice.
 

Sakkura

Illustrious


The Oculus Rift is still a better value for a PC-based VR setup. It costs less, has much better controllers, comes with integrated headphones and a more comfortable headstrap, has more bundled content, and has more advanced API features - including ASW that allows it to run on weaker PC hardware.

There's the Vive Pro, but that's a very expensive $1100 kit.
 


So you're fine with them as they are?

You don't want them to be better and cheaper?

Also: "well, that escalated quickly". A lot of hyperbole in your assumptions!

Cheers!
 

No one said anything about having it use a "cutting edge wireless connection". None of the existing headsets require a wireless connection after all, and that certainly wouldn't be expected in a device costing around $400 or so. Adding the ability for it to receive a video feed over HDMI would cost very little, and the device undoubtedly already includes the components necessary for charging and communication over USB. Likewise, battery power wouldn't be a concern, and the only weight added would be for the cable when running tethered. There's no particularly good reason why such a standalone device couldn't be used tethered. In fact, it would probably offer a better wired experience than the Rift, if the tracking is on par, due to its higher resolution and lack of need for external sensors.
 

bit_user

Splendid
Ambassador

Imaging bringing it over to a friend's house, or several of you get together, somewhere, where you can play a game in the same room. There are commercial operations where you can do this, but it requires expensive VR backpacks. This is a much more affordable and practical solution.

Another use case would probably be visualization in corporate boardrooms, where it would be a lot more practical to give each participant a standalone headset than to have PC VR setups for everyone.

Finally, if you don't have a VR-capable PC, this would be the only thing you need for a VR experience on another level than what phones can deliver.
 

bit_user

Splendid
Ambassador

I don't exactly know FB's strategy - are they trying to lower PC requirements even further, like MS? But I'll tell you one thing: they're surely not delaying bigger and better things with the idea of simply "milking" the public. If you just look at how much has happened since Rift first launched, you'll see that anyone who doesn't keep innovating and improving is not going to stay in the race for long.

I think Vive caught them off-guard, with how much better that was for standing experiences. Then, MS way undercut them on price, and eliminated the need for any kind of external camera. Meanwhile, as you say, others are developing higher-res HMDs. Finally, HTC is releasing an official wireless kit.

My hopes for Rift 2.0:

  • ■ higher-res
    ■ wireless
    ■ inside-out tracking (i.e. no separate camera)
    ■ foveated rendering (even if simplified, like what Go uses)
 

bit_user

Splendid
Ambassador

You asked "When are they making them cheaper and better?", which has been an ongoing process since the Rift first launched. Were you unaware of this?

Did you mean to ask "when are they going to finish making them cheaper and better?". Because that's a very different question.


In fairness, your post came across as a bit of a troll. It's not clear what you would accept as an answer that a disinterested 3rd party would consider both factually correct and informative. In that sense, it's almost rhetorical, as if you're complaining that VR is primitive and expensive. That would be a valid opinion, but it would be better just to come out and say that (or just skip this thread, entirely), so those of us who are interested in VR can carry on with a productive discussion about this news without being disrupted by it.


Yes, that's the idea.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY