Read more.Quote:
Now matches their resolution... at a lower price.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Now matches their resolution... at a lower price.
Great to see another headset also conforming to open VR specifications unlike Oculus. Still too pricey for me (even more so when it's not the finished product).
Dev kit $300.
Consumer Version.... say, $850?
Nvidia tie-in version $1080
StarCraft tie-in $1800
Super-duper limited edition in Razer green $2500
Razer is never cheap and likely feels like lightweight plastic junk.
Ok so it says this is a DEV KIT not a retail one, but what does that really mean?
If you buy this for about £300 surely it'll still work as a headset? Otherwise it'll be pretty pointless for developing with.
Razer usually target the premium end of the market (cost) with budget equipment (quality).
They do occasionally make decent equipment, but for a price
Another VR device? Colour me unimpressed, I'm seeing more use for AR, whereas headsets like this one seem to be pretty much gaming devices.
Can't help but think the optional Leap Motion add-on is the most interesting part. Interaction without the need to hold controllers might feel more natural.
It will work as a headset...Quote:
Originally Posted by gordon861
Final software probably won't work, or updates won't be supported in Dev kit.
Likely also cheaply made and with no warranty once CV comes out.
Probably won't have useful features that the CV will include.
It's nothing particularly special - there is a mount for the leap available on the Rift too, I think they are just offering one bundled in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian224
So this is the same price as a DK2 was last year, and is also a development kit. Nothing particularly special about it or the price (remembering that it doesnt include the accessories that the Rift or Vive does), however I am not complaining or talking it down - the more competition the better. Hopefully it means better prices, more sales and ultimately more VR games will be out there :)
I agree - Just that Razer would be pretty much the last brand I'd buy, even with so many people extolling their green-accented virtues!Quote:
Originally Posted by Spud1
Hows it Oculus's fault that HTC/Valve won't properly support the Oculus SDK on the Vive?Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesemp
I hope this is of a reasonable standard I want VR to work but a few bad headsets could really spoil the whole image of VR.
Because the vive and this OSVR headset both support open standards. (The Oculus SDK did work on VIVE until Oculus blocked the translation layer anyway...) If a big company like Oculus can take over VR with a proprietary SDK it will only set VR back.Quote:
Originally Posted by Percy1983
Despite the name openVR is no more/less open than the Oculus SDK.
The problem is the OculusSDK does perform better and they want to oculus store to associated with the better quality of the OculusSDK. ie the wrapper didn't support features like asynchronous timewarp which is one of the things that make the oculusSDK better, so Vive users could get a subpar experience and then associate that bad experience with the oculus store
Oculus have reached out to HTC/Valve for there cooperation in getting the Vive working on the Oculus SDK and HTC/Valve won't do it.
Why would they do such a thing?
If you have a game and 2 stores at the same price but it will run better if you buy it form one of them which would you choose? DO valve want to loose customers to Oculus when there main income is distributing games?
So is it really Oculus blocking Vive users who want to spend money in there store, or valve blocking users spending there money in another store.
Using basic logic who wins and loses if/when the Vive gets Oculus store support, that gives the answer to who is really blocking the deal, valve the ones who would lose out.
They are as bad as each other really -it's not just that valve won't work with oculus, oculus also won't with valve. There is some justification as oculus invested a lot of money in the Dev of Lucky's tale and eve:Valkyrie for example, and understandably they want to protect their investment...but logically surely they should open up sales to other users as we all know that the profit comes from the software margins, not the hardware.Quote:
Originally Posted by Percy1983
Right now oculus owners are in the best position. Not only is the headset objectively a better bit of kit (mostly from a comfort and usability perspective), but as a rift owner you can buy from steam and save a lot of cash. I paid £17.99 on steam vs. £39.99 on the oculus store. You also have access to some of the best AAA VR games only through the oculus store like eve:Valkyrie and the edge of nowhere.
I think eventually we will see better cross company support once more hardware is out there but for now we are stuck in this weird no mans land :(
I don't think they can... XBox and Playstation both have games you can only play on their system, yet here I am still using a PC and not owning any of either console.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesemp
In fact, I've only ever owned a Nintendo entertainment system and then only because the N64 (or maybe even Game Cube) was out, making the NES cheap enough to afford...
Oculus would have to corner the market by securing exclusives on ALL the best games. Suitability of software would play a part in that, but it's not the driving factor, I think.