GDC 2014 - Oculus Vs Sony - ding-ding... fight !

[GeraldT]

ps4 VR is rumored to be priced at 1000.

sony fail...

ps4 VR is rumored to be priced at $99 (or 1000 oreos)

sony win...

see what I did there?

[brantlew]

if you put the same res to a lower FOV you have a better picture.
So we still have to wait and see where the sweetspot for consumer VR lies - maybe most people prefer better picture quality over a higher fov. Or maybe it is just easier to sell to people if the lower FOV makes it appear nicer in the first place.

And this is the central debate isn't it that influences everything from panel size to lens design? You can somewhat separate the "gamers" from the "VR guys" with this question alone. Gamers like optical density (expressed clumsily as resolution) for fidelity. VR enthusiasts want FOV for immersion. Compromise is inevitable with the result that really nobody is satisfied.

[V8Griff]

And this is the central debate isn't it that influences everything from panel size to lens design? You can somewhat separate the "gamers" from the "VR guys" with this question alone. Gamers like optical density (expressed clumsily as resolution) for fidelity. VR enthusiasts want FOV for immersion. Compromise is inevitable with the result that really nobody is satisfied.

Has anyone from Oculus managed to blag a go in the Sony?

[Mystify]

if you put the same res to a lower FOV you have a better picture.
So we still have to wait and see where the sweetspot for consumer VR lies - maybe most people prefer better picture quality over a higher fov. Or maybe it is just easier to sell to people if the lower FOV makes it appear nicer in the first place.

And this is the central debate isn't it that influences everything from panel size to lens design? You can somewhat separate the "gamers" from the "VR guys" with this question alone. Gamers like optical density (expressed clumsily as resolution) for fidelity. VR enthusiasts want FOV for immersion. Compromise is inevitable with the result that really nobody is satisfied.

I'd argue that optical density increases immersion. I find a blurrier experience much more immersion breaking than a narrow FoV.

[brantlew]

I'd argue that optical density increases immersion. I find a blurrier experience much more immersion breaking than a narrow FoV.

My counter-argument is always something to the effect that very few people have had the opportunity to experience FOV's beyond 100. We all have direct experience to draw upon with respect to optical density. But when people say they would prefer double the optical density versus double the fov, they are making an uninformed statement. How can you make a judgement like that if you have never experienced it? How can you know that the gain in presence due to fov would not be greater the loss of presence due to resolution. In fact, that's the very principle that the Rift was built on. Nobody predicted how qualitatively different the experience was at 90 over 45. Why should we assume that it stops at 90?

[Mystify]

Then I'd split people into camps based on whether they grab something without understanding the specs or whether they know what they are doing and make informed decisions. You may be able to split the latter group as you said, but I don't think wanting a higher resolution is as clear cut vs immersion as you claim, and trying to classify the former group into either based on their decision is just misleading.

[mickman]

If Morpheus sells for $1000, I think I'd sit with Oculus for sometime. I like to create games in Unity & from what. I gather Morpheus is geared purely at consoles. Only thing that would get me shelling out big bucks is a big FOV. 130 degrees or greater.

[Dilip]

I'd argue that optical density increases immersion. I find a blurrier experience much more immersion breaking than a narrow FoV.

My counter-argument is always something to the effect that very few people have had the opportunity to experience FOV's beyond 100. We all have direct experience to draw upon with respect to optical density. But when people say they would prefer double the optical density versus double the fov, they are making an uninformed statement. How can you make a judgement like that if you have never experienced it? How can you know that the gain in presence due to fov would not be greater the loss of presence due to resolution. In fact, that's the very principle that the Rift was built on. Nobody predicted how qualitatively different the experience was at 90 over 45. Why should we assume that it stops at 90?

Exactly one should see the both in action side by side then can make decision in which direction to be selected. I think the present choice of FOV of Oculus is great Mix. what we require is of course little push up in resolution so that screen-door can be mitigated. i think that's the last stone to be turned. here i would like to congratulate team oculus on some tremendous step-ups \

1) Eliminating requirement of base unit and integrating it in HMD itself
2) Powering whole unit via USB (A big step up) (opportunity to use west clip battery opened up here)
3) Improving optics ( ben lang from road to vr mentioned it as "I swear I could feel the difference between the DK1 and DK2 on my
eyes. It’s hard to describe, but where the DK1 feels like looking through binoculars into another world, the DK2 feels like sticking your
head out the window into another world. That’s not to say that the field of view is higher, but there’s something far more comfortable
about using the DK2."
http://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-rift-dev ... -gdc-2014/
4) Adding latancy tracker in HMD itself (Great move and really makes sense as its DK2)
5) Great Cable management as only single cord that to Detachable - Kudos guys that's really user replaceable.
6) Improvement in SDK
7) 3.5 MM audio out port
8) USB Powered port
9) Cosmetic Face lift by hiding IR Stars

May be i might have left out many, i think still.....

GREAT GREAT GREAT ONE - "KEEPING ALL THIS AT 350USD"

Few improvement suggested...

1) 2K OLED Panel
2) Small IR module on back side of head strap to support 360 Degree tracking
3) Flip On-Flip off style head mounted Visor by lifting eye socket pressing mechanism is also great.

I know last two suggestion 'COPY CAT' of SONY but then who can believe..

1) Sony developing Single Screen and RIFT type HMD from past 3 Years,When they have come up with shabby thing like HMZ-T3 at E3
and were calling it VR.
2) Using Single screen which is odd against all past ventures of SONY being Twin Screen
3) Using Same Optic setup

If all above mere co-incidents then nothing wrong in adopting my suggested last to co-incidents, Some times i call such things inspirations.

[Dilip]

Funny side of Journalism

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 01428.html

Mr James Vincent has hammered Sony For moving in VR Distraction.

BTW he also states
"Head-mounted displays of this kind have long been a dream of the gaming industry but their development has been held back by the cost of materials and lacklustre technology. Although attaching a screen to a pair of goggles is hardly rocket science"

Really, its that easy to Make Good VR?

[vittorio]

... Nobody predicted how qualitatively different the experience was at 90 over 45. Why should we assume that it stops at 90?

quoting http://www.leepvr.com/sid1992.php (annotation: when FOV>80° there is no stereo window)

"But for Virtual Reality, the difference is critical. When there is a stereo window there is no ignoring the fact: either you are looking through some sort of window onto the world, or the world has a distant frame around it. Neither of these effects is natural. Neither of these permits what NASA has aptly called the "feeling of immersion in a virtual world". Briefly put, if there is a stereo window, the observer is on the outside looking in. Only when the field of view is so wide that the stereo window vanishes, can the observer rightfully consider himself or herself on the inside of the world looking out and around. The angular field of view required to eliminate the windows is about 80 degrees, so any system that provides a field of view less than 80 degrees, in particular any system with an eye lens whose diameter is much less than about twice the distance from the lens to the center of the eyeball, is going to show a stereo window. Such a system fails in a critical way to qualify as immersive virtual reality."

[GeraldT]

if you put the same res to a lower FOV you have a better picture.
So we still have to wait and see where the sweetspot for consumer VR lies - maybe most people prefer better picture quality over a higher fov. Or maybe it is just easier to sell to people if the lower FOV makes it appear nicer in the first place.

And this is the central debate isn't it that influences everything from panel size to lens design? You can somewhat separate the "gamers" from the "VR guys" with this question alone. Gamers like optical density (expressed clumsily as resolution) for fidelity. VR enthusiasts want FOV for immersion. Compromise is inevitable with the result that really nobody is satisfied.

Just a question of time until someone figures out the optimal way to allow for a customizable FOV that is reported back to the software and the rendering settings are changed in real-time.
For me I can see using a lower FOV for movies, maybe competition FPS multiplayer etc. - while playing with a full FOV when it comes to adventures and leisure gaming.

Right now I guess people will be happy either way and even though I think I would prefer the higher FOV, the "first impression" of a VR headset would profit from a better fidelity (next time I will use resolution again ) for the uninformed crowd. Though given that VR already has a household name with Oculus I have no idea what best to go with.

Whatever you do - I expect to only have to live with it for a year and 3 months in I will likely have formed an opinion

[Jamesliv]

Interesting info/leak/rumour.

Make of it what you will.

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/03/20/ ... much-more/

[Kazioo]

BTW he also states
"Head-mounted displays of this kind have long been a dream of the gaming industry but their development has been held back by the cost of materials and lacklustre technology. Although attaching a screen to a pair of goggles is hardly rocket science"

[brantlew]

Has anyone from Oculus managed to blag a go in the Sony?

I'm stuck in Irvine. The press seems generally pleased with it. I'm sure our guys have tried it, but I haven't talked with them yet. We are simultaneously the best and worst judges of VR equipment. Our brains and eyes are trained now to key-in on the smallest, almost sub-conscious details of these things so it's pretty easy for us to pick apart any flaws. But at the same time we can become too overexposed to appreciate how an average participant experiences it holistically.

[V8Griff]

Funny side of Journalism

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 01428.html

Mr James Vincent has hammered Sony For moving in VR Distraction.

BTW he also states
"Head-mounted displays of this kind have long been a dream of the gaming industry but their development has been held back by the cost of materials and lacklustre technology. Although attaching a screen to a pair of goggles is hardly rocket science"

Really, its that easy to Make Good VR?

Shows he knows Jack S***t about VR.

if it WAS that easy then why has it taken nearly 20 years since the last plausible, big money effort to get something that's even close?

[V8Griff]

Has anyone from Oculus managed to blag a go in the Sony?

I'm stuck in Irvine. The press seems generally pleased with it. I'm sure our guys have tried it, but I haven't talked with them yet. We are simultaneously the best and worst judges of VR equipment. Our brains and eyes are trained now to key-in on the smallest, almost sub-conscious details of these things so it's pretty easy for us to pick apart any flaws. But at the same time we can become too overexposed to appreciate how an average participant experiences it holistically.

I agree with your comment about you guys being the best and worse to judge.

On one hand you're biased and picky because of your day to day work but equally too close to the technology to judge it as 'Joe Punter'. It would still be interesting to know how it compares.

That said even exposure to the DK1 on a regular basis makes folk forget that the majority of people are usually blown away with it. I see it on a regular basis when people laugh at or criticise the Virtuality kit which I will and did defend to the hilt. For technology that was more than 20 years ago and was real time, true 3D, in a VR HMD it was sensational. People forget what the available in the mass market at that time.

[Libertine]

if you put the same res to a lower FOV you have a better picture.
So we still have to wait and see where the sweetspot for consumer VR lies - maybe most people prefer better picture quality over a higher fov. Or maybe it is just easier to sell to people if the lower FOV makes it appear nicer in the first place.

And this is the central debate isn't it that influences everything from panel size to lens design? You can somewhat separate the "gamers" from the "VR guys" with this question alone. Gamers like optical density (expressed clumsily as resolution) for fidelity. VR enthusiasts want FOV for immersion. Compromise is inevitable with the result that really nobody is satisfied.

I'd argue that optical density increases immersion. I find a blurrier experience much more immersion breaking than a narrow FoV.

Im the opposite, i sacrifice a little detail to get a wider FOV. I have a lot of experience with changing FOV and resolutions (not to mention dpi, fill factor and scaling) and my experience thus far involves constantly trying to achieve equilibrium with equipment that simply won't get me where i want it to be. When i was playing Skyrim recently for example, i would constantly fluctuate from a high FOV, pulling my 46" 3DTV closer to me and dealing with the reduced clarity within my primary FOV, even going up to 120+, which looked incredible when the Nvidia 3D settings were just right for my IPD and viewing distance. However, eventually i would miss the detail and reduce the FOV and pull the screen back somewhat. But then i'd encounter a scene like a huge cavern, or high cliff view that i knew would look/feel amazing with the high FOV and shifted back. I kept doing this over and over. However, if the resolution was higher, i probably would have just left it. That wasn't the only problem though, as was the enlarging of the image at the sides of the display at large FOV settings.

In my experience the threshold at which resolution becomes an issue somewhat varies with each game because of the types of scenery encountered. For example, i could not play Battlefield 3 with my 46" in 720p/scaled because the levels were so large that i could not spot enemies at distances where they could easily kill me with a standard weapon, not to mention the annoying snipers. Also, in games like DayZ where you have a ton of beautiful tall grass rendering around you at just about all times and trees with fine leaves, the fineness of those details will be heavily affected by resolution, while a game like Metro 2033 which has high detail, but low viewing distances mainly because of the darkness, isn't as big of a deal. Needless to say there will be a constant increase in detail over time while the new consoles will probably cause a huge increase in average detail in PC games as well. (Just look at the difference in graphics from GTA 4 and 5 made for the PS3.)


I switched from a 2560x1600 30" to a 46" 3DTV, used in 720p several years ago which was pretty blurry also due to scaling but I loved it because of the 3D and slightly greater FOV and have never looked back. I now use a Samsung 46" with it's unscaled checkerboard 3D.

[rowanunderwood]

ps4 VR is rumored to be priced at 1000.

sony fail...

So we have the following

PC VR = Oculus $350 + pc $1000 + STEM $150 = $1500

PS4 VR = Console $400 + Morpheus $1000 + Camera and controller ($100) = $1500

So prices will in the same range; however, the Oculus will be vastly superior due to most of the money going directly into rendering power.

[Drewbdoo]

Just chiming in here to say that there is no way the real cost is going to be $1,000. Just no friggin' way. Sony isn't retarded. I'm betteing on $300-500 max. PS4 consumers will not pay more for the goggles than for the console. The HMZ's are not predictors on the cost of the morpheus.

[blazespinnaker]

It all depends on how seriously they want the business.

If they're serious, I can see them selling with minimal margins.

Sony can get high rez panels very very cheap because of their cell phone business.

Likely the entire cost of this is all in R&D.

[GeraldT]

... there is no way the real cost is going to be $1,000. Just no friggin' way. Sony isn't retarded.

I second that!

[Zoide]

Is there any chance that Oculus may reconsider its stance against the use of diffusion filters? I thought I read somewhere that the Morpheus had less of a screen door effect than DK2, and that it might be thanks to the use of a filter.

Thanks

[GeraldT]

Is there any chance that Oculus may reconsider its stance against the use of diffusion filters?

of course - if they stumble over a solution that only has benefits I have no doubt they will embrace it. but if they do not use it, then they will likely have good reasons for that decision. the Sony VR system having less of a screendoor is most likely connected to them having a smaller FOV, so fidelity and screendoor appear better but it will come at a price (less presence).

[MSat]

I'd really like to hear what some of the guys at Oculus thought about the Sony HMD. As far as I can tell, what they demoed didn't use low persistence, which I think is a deal breaker from this point on.

[GeraldT]

I still think VR with the DK1 is glorious ... give me higher resolution and positional tracking, maybe a higher refresh rate and it would become even more so.

Not saying I would want a DK2 without low persistence, just saying that even without that tech I bet most people that are not enthusiasts would still be very impressed and likely to buy one if they care for VR on a PS4.
Oculus did not demo low persistence until recently, so I guess Sony will get there too - but if not it only means that the Oculus will look superior, I doubt it will kill console VR.
And once people get used to play VR on a PS4 and then try an Oculus they might say things like "ohh, why is this so sharp?" ... big win for VR on PC and Oculus ... but I still expect Sony to have low persistence and OLED with the final consumer version.

[Dilip]

I'd really like to hear what some of the guys at Oculus thought about the Sony HMD. As far as I can tell, what they demoed didn't use low persistence, which I think is a deal breaker from this point on.

Why you want them to shred sony product to rags for its obvious flaws, we all know sony prototype is inferior on many fronts when compared to Oculus DK2 may be better than DK1 but sure inferior to DK2.

I even disgust media for doing some BU##S**T Article Headlines.

A .spec sheet Sony’s project Morpheus takes on oculus rift

http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/21/55339 ... culus-rift

B. Project Morpheus vs. Oculus Rift: The Coming VR War Will Be Great For The Industry

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/ ... -industry/

C. Sony's PS4 VR headset could blow Oculus Rift out of the water
http://www.techradar.com/news/gaming/so ... er-1221791

I mean why Sony's PS4 VR headset could blow Oculus Rift out of the water? When they both are in different waters Oculus Rift being Sea barracuda and Sony Morpheus a Pond Gold Fish.

Then there is also a thing that Project Morpheus not for PC at all but for PS4 Sony Wanted to Keep cost low (using LCD) to make it viable PS4 accessary then how the hack thing is going to matter to you?

Why i said inferior
1) Smaller FOV
2) LCD ( Bound to have blur and Side effects for using under high magnification)

Its like asking Lockheed Martin to Review AIRBUS 320. Both are very diffrenet targeted to different area of market.

Even if Sony Update Project Morpheus with their TRILUMINOS LCD/OLED they are going to kEEp it locked down on PS4. Why to invest in PS4 @400 USD + MOve+ Project Morpheus ( even if they sell move + Morpheus @ 400 USD ~ a very very rare possibility) its near 800 USD investment for VR which is going to Lag BEHIND DUE TO HARDWARE OF PS4. Even game like WITCHER3 Said to PUSHED IT TO BOUNDRY in 2D.

[MSat]

^ I could be wrong, but I think I could trust Palmer and some of the other Oculus guys to give an accurate assessment of Sony's hardware, as their experience and involvement in the field gives them the most credibility in a review. I don't expect the Sony HMD to be crap. I'm guessing it's pretty close to the DK2 (which can also operate in "full persistence" mode), but I'd like to hear about its technical merits or drawbacks such as screen, tracking, and optics quality.

[V8Griff]

I'd really like to hear what some of the guys at Oculus thought about the Sony HMD. As far as I can tell, what they demoed didn't use low persistence, which I think is a deal breaker from this point on.

Why you want them to shred sony product to rags for its obvious flaws, we all know sony prototype is inferior on many fronts when compared to Oculus DK2 may be better than DK1 but sure inferior to DK2. .

Who said anyone wanted the Oculus to Shred the Sony HMD?

I for one who asked Brantlaw (higher up this thread) if anyone from Oculus had seen it wanted to know if they felt it was DK1 or DK1.5 or whatever. To compare the 'competition' doesn't mean you have to be critical, indeed being overly critical for the wrong reasons isn't usually that helpful.

Also the fact that this version only runs on the PS4 doesn't mean that any future version wouldn't be PC compatible.

Actually I've wondered if this version of the Morpheus is actually running on a PS4. I find it quite strange that the pictures I've seen show the various cables running into a unit hidden away in a white box or stand., it might be that I've not seen better pictures any one seen anything different?

[GeraldT]

When carmack tweeted about "adjust PS4 VR expectations" then it was not a bash, but a rather interesting guide on what to expect from someone that knows what to expect from hardware a thousand times better than 99% of the fanboys complaining about it.
So I would love to hear what the Oculus guys (especially the tech guys) think of the Sony set, because it will beat every "take with a grain of salt" journalist opinion. But I can totally see why they do not do it. Sony has more Fanboys than Oculus has enthusiasts and alienating them likely hurts much more than giving us this rather worthless piece of information.

[V8Griff]

When carmack tweeted about "adjust PS4 VR expectations" then it was not a bash, but a rather interesting guide on what to expect from someone that knows what to expect from hardware a thousand times better than 99% of the fanboys complaining about it.
So I would love to hear what the Oculus guys (especially the tech guys) think of the Sony set, because it will beat every "take with a grain of salt" journalist opinion. But I can totally see why they do not do it. Sony has more Fanboys than Oculus has enthusiasts and alienating them likely hurts much more than giving us this rather worthless piece of information.

I'd agree with everything you say except the last bit.

I wouldn't say it was a worthless bit of information as it will let us know just how serious Sony are this time and if the technology does appear to be gaining some proper support and traction from a major games industry player.

Although if the opinion was just "the Rift is soooo much better" I agree it would be worthless

[GeraldT]

I wouldn't say it was a worthless bit of information as it will let us know just how serious Sony are this time and if the technology does appear to be gaining some proper support and traction from a major games industry player.

ohh... Johns tweet was worth gold, I am talking about the worth of a judgement lets say from Palmer and his thoughts about the state of the current state of Morpheus. Of course I would still be very interested in this, but just because I am curious. It would be nothing worth to me as a developer, nor would it help me make a buying decision as a gamer since it is their first prototype demonstration.
It was a poor choice of words though.

[mickman]

Regarding GDC2014 & VR peripherals.

Oculus
Sony
----------
Sixense
Priovr
Omni

I'm bringing this up as PrioVR have their KickStarter running now ( only a few days left)
I've purchased both the Sixense Stem system & a DK2 but ..... WoW after watching PrioVR's promo video... I like the features of this motion tracking device (suit)
DK2 is not wireless... But from what I've heard.. CV1 will be yes? So perhaps in the long run... PrioVR is a good choice.

[youtube-hd]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TxzCaKJJ_9o[/youtube-hd]

[GeraldT]

PrioVR is awesome and as developer I really want one to animate models. As a gamer I really want one too, but I also would want something to play with it. As a poor person I did not buy it - too big a risk of having cool hardware that gathers dust most of the time.
Pretty similar feeling about the STEM.

I will buy every device that I feel is priced for the consumer market, but I will stay away from every device that is aimed at professionals because I want to make/play games.

[Zoide]

I'd love for CV1 to be wireless as long as no latency/quality were sacrificed. That said, I don't think I've read about a wireless CV1 anywhere aside from wishful thinking from fans like us

PrioVR looks pretty cool though. I'd love to hear more about how precise PrioVR can be for fine control at the hands. For example, the type of stuff you can do with STEM for precision tasks like MakeVR or dataviz manipulation.

[V8Griff]

I've gone out on a limb and backed the PrioVR as it looks multi-use and pretty awesome. I couldn't really afford to but I thought it was potentially worth taking the risk as I can see a couple of projects it would work on, so I need to make these projects happen. Nice bit of pressure incentive.

The STEM would be useful for other projects but having experience of the Hydra I wanted to see just how much better the STEM system was as it needed to be much better than the Hydra.

I didn't back the STEM but regretting it now as the Pre-Order prices are nearly double the KS prices....

[MSat]

PrioVR is cool, but how could you use it for games besides with the Omni or with a game based around a dedicated play space?

[brantlew]

I've gone out on a limb and backed the PrioVR as it looks multi-use and pretty awesome. I couldn't really afford to but I thought it was potentially worth taking the risk as I can see a couple of projects it would work on, so I need to make these projects happen. Nice bit of pressure incentive.

The STEM would be useful for other projects but having experience of the Hydra I wanted to see just how much better the STEM system was as it needed to be much better than the Hydra.

I didn't back the STEM but regretting it now as the Pre-Order prices are nearly double the KS prices....

I backed both STEM and PrioVR, Mildly excited about STEM, but super stoked about PrioVR. I've been wanted to build a sensor suit for integration into RedRovr for over a year now. It sucks because we have boxes of trackers laying around that I can use, but honestly I have almost zero free time anymore with the Oculus schedule to engage in personal research. So when Prio came up, I jumped all over it to save me a whole lot of time. PrioVR + DK2 + RedRovr might just be the ultimate VR experience. Just to be clear about this - this is only a personal project.

[usb247]

Sony's system looks more robust. The in game hands will be standardized across PS4 VR which is nice. PC VR is still highly fragmented with too many devices and no standard setup from game to game.

[mickman]

There's been a lot of debate lately regarding Oculus announcing the development of a motion control system that compliments the Rift,( similar to the Stem system... ). but I believe Oculus will bring both PrioVR & Sixense onboard... Just as we are witnessing a very close relationship they've already forged with Valve... Who's to say Oculus are not already a part of Valve.

[Libertine]

There's been a lot of debate lately regarding Oculus announcing the development of a motion control system that compliments the Rift,( similar to the Stem system... ). but I believe Oculus will bring both PrioVR & Sixense onboard... Just as we are witnessing a very close relationship they've already forged with Valve... Who's to say Oculus are not already a part of Valve.

I would love a PrioVR-like system, just for the exercise, but i hope they modularize all this stuff, like audio, etc in a way such that people can get just what they want.