For me that is a plus. I also don't want to buy the xbox controller that comes with. Not need for flight sims and that is 90% of what I plan to use OR / Vive for. If I want to do other things later I'll buy Touch etc.
Lack of flight Sim support is also an issue. So far only DCS and Gaijin have had shown any support for VR.
I have DCS and have tested the DK2 in DCS and it worked well. But DCS is not my main sim.
If we can get VR working in Cliffs of Dover or Rise Of Flight I'm in. Until then the OR/Vive will be a redundant piece of hardware to me. Much like my DK2 which sees a brief outing once every few months in DCS.
The price is $599. At least that's what it was when I placed my order on 1/6. The display is provided by a pair of 2160x1440 panels. A GTX 970 isn't that expensive of a card, especially considering what you're paying for the Rift itself.
FlyInside FSX and P3D add Oculus Rift support to both Microsoft Flight Simulator X and Lockheed's Prepar3D. FlyInside also supports the Leap motion controller which allows you to manipulate cockpit controls. (It works amazingly well with the DK2, too!) https://flyinside-fsx.com/
Yes, it's expensive. It's also first-generation consumer hardware. What did the first generation CD player from Sony cost? (Google says $1000.) Understand that the CV1 sets the /bottom/ rung for VR hardware going forward. It's only going to get better from here.
The display is provided by a pair of 2160x1440 panels.
2160x1200 according to everything I've seen.
After borrowing a DK2 from work for a weekend I came to the conclusion that I'd hold off on VR until the resolution was *significantly* increased.
There is a huge difference in the VR qualities between the DK2, and CV1. The CV1 has two custom VR displays, and custom optic lenses, far superior to the DK2 displays and lenses. The jury is still out whether or not the improvements are good enough for a decent combat flight sim experience. The DK2 wasn't good enough, but I have hopes the CV1 will make the grade.
Yes, it's expensive. It's also first-generation consumer hardware. What did the first generation CD player from Sony cost? (Google says $1000.) Understand that the CV1 sets the /bottom/ rung for VR hardware going forward. It's only going to get better from here.
If anything, we've already had a substantial improvement over first-gen consumer VR, and for just around the same price!
We've gone from 263x230 per eye across 27 to 50 degrees FOV at 60 Hz to 1080x1200 per eye across at least 100 degrees FOV, if not more, at 90 Hz. That makes the difference from "looking at a distant monitor with hideously low resolution" to "putting your head in the game" right there.
We have translational, full 6DoF head-tracking, and the same for hand-tracking motion controllers.
We've even got a better understanding of what to do and what not to do in VR, so instead of games having HMD support tacked on, they're designed around it.
The technology's come a very long way, yet my concern is that people may still find it too expensive to buy into, killing the market before it even gets back onto its feet again.
I just hope it lasts long enough that we see more widespread VR support in our fave flight sims, if they can be bothered to drop in new DX11 renderers for things like Falcon BMS.
Some encouraging statements below from Matt Wagner at DCS on Froogles youtube VR Blog. Getting that time warp thing working is huge in VR. Also good to hear DCS has one of the CV1 prototype versions for testing. Hopefully they will also have more information on their Vive implementation, as someone on reddit is suggesting there are some latency issues with Vives time warp software.
1- Keypad 5 re-centers view 2- We now have DCS 1.5/2.0 working great in the CV Rift with 1.0 RC runtime. Night and day compared to DK2 with 0.8. 3- The big item we are now working on is better mouse interaction with the cockpit while in VR. 4- For Rift CV you will ideally want 90 FPS; however, we have "timewarp" working great now. So, even at less than 90 FPS, the experience is very smooth.
That is from June and I see no mention of a scrapped camera!
The camera is visible in the renderings. The latest info on the actual commercial product does not have a camera, according to all information thus far released. Hence the camera was apparently an idea at once that did not make it to fruition.
Its interesting that the Oculus site had 1.9 million hits on preorder day. Even taking away multiple individual hits and cons, thats a lot of people interested in VR. More than I would have expected at this early stage.
The display is provided by a pair of 2160x1440 panels.
2160x1200 according to everything I've seen.
After borrowing a DK2 from work for a weekend I came to the conclusion that I'd hold off on VR until the resolution was *significantly* increased.
There is a huge difference in the VR qualities between the DK2, and CV1. The CV1 has two custom VR displays, and custom optic lenses, far superior to the DK2 displays and lenses. The jury is still out whether or not the improvements are good enough for a decent combat flight sim experience. The DK2 wasn't good enough, but I have hopes the CV1 will make the grade.
I too had an impression that significant resolution is needed for flightsim use however the split screen you said might be the savior... I'll wait for the review anyway, 600$+shipping+exchange rate+tax made it like 900$ in my country.
It should be patently obvious for most people that the inclusion of the Xbox controller had no impact on whether or not they included a front facing camera.
Whatever, I'm not going to play your ad hominem argument game..
You bring it on yourself. You've championed the Vive product, and it could well end up being the better product. You don't have to post misinformation about the other product to help make your point. So far all the VR companies are keeping their specs very close to their chest. The only way we will really know which unit is best for our particular needs is to try them out ourselves. There are suggestions that the consumer version Rift will be demonstrated in retail stores this April. Hopefully the consumer version of the Vive will be available for testing in retail stores around the same time period.
Can't wait to try out DCS in VR. I got the GearVR and even with its greatly limited and mostly low-quality content, it was a surprisingly immersive experience.
Oculus comparability test could fail your cpu because it is not a Haswell chip, despite the fact your cpu is overclocked and will outperform some Haswell cpu's. I'm thinking there are a good amount of high end overclocked Sandy Bridge computers that will run Oculus just fine.
It's only a guide at the end of the day, realistically the compatibility test can't take into account every possible combination or hardware which may or may not be modified/overclocked/tweaked etc.
I'm running a Sandybridge i7 2600k @ 4.6Ghz, whilst the tool says the CPU isn't good enough I know that it's perfectly fine. I guess Oculus have to play it on the safe side rather than recommend something which could turn out borderline and then backfire on themselves.
Thanks for posting! Cant wait for my RIIIIIIIIIIIIIF! Yay I am so excited everytime i think about how long until i finally receive that "shipped" mail:)
That's why they have been so coy about not telling us the real FoV. They also promised multiple facial inserts to ship alongside the HMD. They removed that line and nothing shippped with the HMD. Now they can be purchased as extras some time in the future.
Tim Sweeney, who works on UE4 and Unreal Tournament, also isn't pleased with Oculus;
Not sure why Tim Sweeney is making a song and dance about this....it's really no different to any other portal out there such as Google, Steam, Android etc.
I think the physiological effects will, for most people, ease up considerably after you become acclimatized to the experience through frequent exposure. Some of the VR experiences, such as intense dogfighting in space, aerobatics etc etc, would make most people ill in real life at first. I can see hardware advances helping with that but never completely eliminating it.
When I put myself through instrument training I had a very hard time with motion sickness when under the 'hood', flying very benign maneuvers in a C172. At one point I thought I would have to just give up on it. I slowly became desensitized to it (thankfully). I would imagine the VR experience will be similar process. Can't wait until I get my Rift and Oculus ready PC towards the end of April!
If that is the case then some VR experiences will never be suitable for mainstream. Unfortunately action packed games and sims involve a lot of motion, turning and acceleration/deceleration. In a combat 'sim' like Eve Valkerie that situation is complicated by the fact that you are not only maneuvering your own ship, but looking at your adversary rather than where you are going. That's going to mess you up to begin with. It doesn't matter if it is the Rift, Vive or any other headset. If you are prone to motion sickness then you are going to come up against this problem.
I own a DK2 and while I think it is a great innovation I do have concerns how VR is going to work for me. I only play combat flight Sims, primarily only RoF and Cliffs of Dover right now.
RoF doesn't look like it will ever get official support (and that includes BoS/BoM) and will need third party tools to use in VR. Cliffs of Dover is showing some progress in VR for native support.
But, from my experience with the DK2, the display needs a massive jump in resolution. Despite the Cove getting a slightly larger Res it is still short of what is really required. Cove users are saying the "screen door" effect is still there. That you can still see pixels and the gaps between them. Oculus have said that any improvement in that respect is years away.
In summary the near future of VR is still very much an early adopter realm. My concern is by the time VR becomes mature enough to provide what I consider essential for what I need. Then when it is improved enough for me, will I still be playing RoF and CoD.
I have a feeling that we are at the end of the road for hi fidelity combat flight sims. I'm not a massive fan of DCS or BoS/BoM.
My dreams of flying in hi res VR in my favourite Sims may not happen.
But, from my experience with the DK2, the display needs a massive jump in resolution. Despite the Cove getting a slightly larger Res it is still short of what is really required. Cove users are saying the "screen door" effect is still there. That you can still see pixels and the gaps between them. Oculus have said that any improvement in that respect is years away.
You have exactly the same thoughts on resolution as me after using the DK2. We've actually got a CV1 in work at the moment, am trying to get the opportunity to check it out although it won't be with flight sims unfortunately.
The statement about improvements being years away is odd, when has anything like that been true with technology? I wouldn't accuse them of outright lying, but you can appreciate it wouldn't make very good business sense to let on about a better version being right round the corner. I would assume that higher density screens already exist (at least in pre-production form) but given the amount of negativity over the 'high specs' needed to run the first versions and the desire to market it as a mainstream product it makes commercial sense to keep things in check.
DK1 1280x 800 / 640x 800 Per Eye / Pixel Density 215 PPI HDP 1920x1080 / 960x1080 Per Eye / Pixel Density 314 PPI *( DK1 w/ HD1080P Scren) CCP 1920x1080 / 960x1080 Per Eye / Pixel Density 314 PPI *( New OLED 1080P Display w. High Refresh) DK2 1920x1080 / 960x1080 Per Eye / Pixel Density 386 PPI *( Screen / Assembly From Samsung Note 3) CBP 2560x1440 /1280x1440 Per Eye / Pixel Density 543 PPI *( Note, Exact Screens for CBP are Unknown) CBP 2160x1200 /1080x1200 Per Eye / Pixel Density 456 PPI *( If the CBP Uses the same Screens as the CV1) CV1 2160x1200 /1080x1200 Per Eye / Pixel Density 456 PPI *( Dual 1080x1200 3.5 Inch Displays)
* The Rift Consumer Version's Toshiba TC358870XBG HDMI to MIPI Chipset Supports up to 3840 x 2160 Pixels..
A very quick google says Sharp announced an 800+PPI screen a year ago. The same article also claims Samsung had an 860 PPI screen.
The hardware to run games at higher resolutions might be considered a bit extreme, but dual 980s (even vanilla ones) or something similar should pretty capable of 2560x1440 @90Hz.
Consoles have used the tactic of exclusive titles to entice users to their platforms for years now.
Unless the game is a massive draw however I feel it's usually viewed as a cynical or negative tactic which may deter users.
I'm personally not a fan of the way Oculus is doing business at the moment. I feel that as long as the hardware performance is similar, users will be drawn toward the more open approach of other platforms.
EVE: Valkyrie On PC Oculus Rift only. Why do they need to keep their software Rift only? Why can't they allow all HMD's to use their software like Steam? That kind of proprietary behavior is not a good for VR in the long run. We will see if they continue on this path. I hope not.
Application has to meet specific Criteria to be on the oculus store, there are literally dozens of games that have fantastic Rift Support that arent on the store because they dont meet all the criteria.
This is probably the best comparison your going to see between the Vive and Rift systems. Tested is probably on of the most respected review sites on the internet. https://youtu.be/EBieKwa2ID0
"There are some sketchy things in the Terms of Service for the Oculus Rift, and now, a member of Congress is formally asking the company to explain some of the items."
The HUD is readable, at least for the A10C. Not sharp, but at least you can use it. The feeling of being immersed in a physical cockpit is to be honest, simply stunning. Viewing distant objects is a definite weak area, limited by resolution. That means labels are a necessity until you are pretty close to the target. Despite this, the experience as a whole is (for me at least), a huge step forward from my old 32in 1080p TV and Track-IR.
I needed to upgrade to a new PC (my gaming laptop was nowhere near powerful enough to run the Rift). I ended up buying one of the Oculus Ready PC bundles.
There is no doubt that I could have built a suitable PC for less, but these days I am pretty much a plug and play kind of guy. Performance seems good to me.
That was a very useful video SkateZilla. Thanks also for your assistance on the DCS forum where you helped me get the Rift up and running (I'm Astronut over there).
You going for a 1080GTX? im waiting for those too. i was hoping for the Titan. i was planning to build a whole new computer for the Pascal Titan, but the GTX1080 will be a place holder, so now i also am thinkin of getting a watercooler block for my i7-2600K, and try to push it to 4.5Ghz, instead of wasting money on a whole new computer...
I've purchased an EVGA GTX980Ti in the hopes I will be able to take advantage of their 3 month upgrade path. It looks like the Pascal may just appear before the three month deadline expires. I haven't bought any of the cheaper AMD CPU/GPU hardware for quite sometime, simply because the NVidia hardware was working better in the sims I used. The new AMD gpu's do sound interesting, and will keep an eye on the VR benchmarks.
I've not watched all of both videos, but does he ever even try leaning in closer to the HUD / instruments to read them?
Unfortunately, leaning doesnt help for HUD(hologram) and zooming was disabled in DK2 not sure about CV1 though.
@SkateZilla
Would you kindly post an impression on the readability&viability of CV1 in DCS ? I'm still on the fence..
Look above your post.
I might have missed your comment on the readability of HUD&MFD, viability as I skipped a video little bit. Anyway, it looks like you are doing fine in the mission(mav, gun run) with CV1.
Although is Air to Ground mission still viable without turning on lables? How many stars do you give to CV1 if 10 stars are given to express your satisfaction?
The HUD is readable, at least for the A10C. Not sharp, but at least you can use it. The feeling of being immersed in a physical cockpit is to be honest, simply stunning. Viewing distant objects is a definite weak area, limited by resolution. That means labels are a necessity until you are pretty close to the target. Despite this, the experience as a whole is (for me at least), a huge step forward from my old 32in 1080p TV and Track-IR.
Thankyou for the review!
if mission is well planned(have Intel on the (rough) enemy location) do you still have problem with identifying A-G target with TGP with CV1?
When you strafe A-G target with A-10C are you able to do a decent gun run without lables on?
I'm awaiting Pascal/Polaris myself and have done well not to rush out and get a 980ti. The temptation is pulling my hair out.
I've just passed on my old i7 2600k to my son and installed the replacement i7 6700k with 32GB RAM (massive overkill but it was dirt cheap)......so just awaiting the new GPU's and my Oculus.
The big question is....what kind of VR optimizations might these new gpu's have. Upgrading from 980Ti to Pascal 1080 or maybe even a Polaris might add a significant boost in VR performance. AMD,and NVIDIA are heavily invested in VR hardware, and software optimizations. Hopefully they come up with something significant.
I'm waiting for some legacy support for older games like RoF, BoS and Cliffs of Dover before I make any expensive jumps into VR. I have a DK2 and have had a look around DCS (which was a positive experience)
But I'm not a fan of DCS and wouldn't lay out the sort of money that OR or Vive cost unless I could use it usefully.
I know there is some speculation that BoS/BoM is being investigated for potential VR support and Team Fusion are working with Cliffs of Dover and VR compatibility. If that happens I'm in.
I straddle both camps, but it has to be worth it. I was in at ground level with TrackIR, when all it did was mouse emulation. But that was relatively cheap.
Like I say I have the DK2 and occasional fire up DCS to have a fly around, but until there is more usable (to me) content I can't justify laying out £800 for a quick spin
Pascal performance leaks with 3DMark11 are interesting, but its not the information that VR users will be looking for. The important test is how the 980TI, Pascal's, AMD equivalents perform with VRMark, and their VR optimized drivers.
For some people its a very good idea to wait for future versions of VR hardware, as they will definitely be buying a better product at maybe even a cheaper price point, depending on the cost of the improved features. BUT even with the first consumer versions of VR, most users have found they no longer have any interest in flying with a monitor, so its certainly not as bad as some would suggest. Its not the quality of the first consumer version of VR that will hold back the mass adoption of VR, its the affordability. When most people have demo'd the first consumer versions of VR, they want it. The only question is can they afford it. You can wait for a better consumer version for ever is you want, but I think you will be missing out. I never regretted being an early adopter of TrackIR as it was HUGE immersive improvement over the Hatswitch, but no where near the immersion improvement of VR.
The more you keep talking about 'weak' performance with the 1070/1080 in comparison to what I'm wanting, my impatience will only wear so thin until I just splash out on a 980ti.
The more you keep talking about 'weak' performance with the 1070/1080 in comparison to what I'm wanting, my impatience will only wear so thin until I just splash out on a 980ti.
Must.stay.strong
Your in luck the 1080 is far superior to the 980Ti especially in VR performance with its new single pass multiple projection tech. There is also absolutely no need to wait for the 1080Ti, unless your also waiting for the next generation VR headset. This new NVidia gpu is exactly what VR needed. That said it will be interesting to see VRmark benchmarks comparing the 980TI to the 1080. The difference should be considerable. I have 46 days left to upgrade my EVGA 980TI to the 1080, so it shouldn't be a problem.
Out of interest, what games are people planning to use the rift with?
So far I have spent most of my VR time playing DCS World. Very impressive in VR even though the resolution makes spotting targets a challenge. Flying the UH1 Huey is a great experience in VR (and a lot easier to control when compared to flying it using a regular monitor)
FSX Steam Edition with the FlyInside plugin. I picked up a Leap Motion sensor to use with this too, which is pretty amazing. You are literally reaching out with your hands for switches and other controls in the virtual cockpit.
I just installed Elite Dangerous but haven't spent much time with it in VR yet.
Eve Valkerie was a bit disappointing.
Subnautica looks fantastic in the Rift, but strangely it is the only game I have played so far that makes me feel slightly off colour.
I had a OR demo at Best Buy this past Thursday, the guy conducting the demo said that Best Buy would have OR in stock next week. He didn't say how many per store etc.
I've been following VR since Palmer burst on the scene and was really excited at first. But since DX9 support was dropped meaning my main title RoF was out of contention, then the price of the retail unit.
I'm struggling to think how £800 is justifiable for a few mins in DCS every few weeks.
Plus the DK2 showed up some limitation for combat flight simmers with the resolution and from what I've read, although the Rift is a big improvement it is still limited.
Holding out for Cliffs to come good for VR, that might tip me to shelling out some cash
Cliffs of Dover, and DCS World War II are on the top of my list for Rift use. WarThunder might be fun to just fly around and look at its decent terrain engine, but its business model sucks. I'm also interested in taking another look at racing sims like Project Cars. I've also ordered the VIRZoom bike, for some much need physical activity. VR and tracked controllers could also have an amazing capability to provide exercise as a bi product of having fun. In the future it will be interesting to see if gamers are described as fitness freaks rather than couch potatoes.
WarThunder might be fun to just fly around and look at its decent terrain engine, but its business model sucks.
Pretty much my opinion of WT. Very pretty, but struggled to keep my interest. It definitely wouldn't push me towards VR.
I am not putting WT on the same league as CLOD or DCS and share your impressions of the game. But if you already have a rift or vive then you should definitely give it a try. In VR, the feeling is very different specially if you go with the "Simulation Battle" settings. Its very immersive even with the low level of fidelity.
It's already much, MUCH more comfortable than the Note 4 Gear VR, albeit just as likely to make my face all warm and toasty after a while.
First thing I did after setting it up was some DCS. I gotta say, that P-51D cockpit's pretty cramped!
Asynchronous timewarp is clearly doing its job, as head rotation was very smooth even when the framerate was noticeably choppy otherwise. I'm clearly going to have to roll back some settings to keep my frames up, though there's only so much you can do when it's DCS. Even EDGE hasn't completely sorted out the engine's inefficiencies.
Also, I have some serious newfound respect for actual fighter pilots who really have to crane their neck around to check their six, especially under high-G loads. It's a real wake-up call after being used to TrackIR for so many years; better build up those neck muscles!
I have, however, noticed some issues with games launched through Steam defaulting to my sound card output as opposed to the Rift's built-in headphones (which are surprisingly good and loud at their defaults, I might add), DCS included. Gotta keep changing the Windows default sound device back and forth before I launch anything there, though SteamVR has a means of automating this based on whether it's running or not.
Awesome! Glad to hear that you finally received your Rift. I have the same issues with the sound device selection. At least it is easy to change manually.
What the components cost is not what dictates unit price. There is a lot of r&d to be recouped too. That is nearly always the biggest factor when pricing new tech.
