HMD competition 2014!

[deiby3D]

hi guys what's going on, the competition will start soon.
who will win?

oculus rift coming soon
cinemizer 3D oled
sony HMZ-T3 coming soon
vrAse coming soon
Nvidia near-eye display coming soon
ST1080
microsoft name unknown

who will win?

regards (deiby3D)

[Lookforyourhands]

http://www.roadtovr.com/2013/08/14/infi ... -vote-7508

[remosito]

hi guys what's going on, the competition will start soon.
who will win?

oculus rift coming soon
cinemizer 3D oled
sony HMZ-T3 coming soon
vrAse coming soon
Nvidia near-eye display coming soon
ST1080
microsoft name unknown

who will win?

regards (deiby3D)

nvidia near-eye lightfield display coming soon???

I seriously doubt that!

[FR3D]

oculus will win ...

because they have valve, carmack, tridef ... and this community !!!

best regards FR3D

[oma]

Hopefully, and i really hope that there are no winners. Hopefully the games/apps and everything else will be available for all different HMD products and easily configurated.

I might buy the oculus consumer version but i've been thinking if infiniteye would work with rift games and products then it would be a different story, as the 210 fov is just more immersive and you can actually get lost in there. Anyway oculus has done what they tried to do back in the eighties, tho its now easier as the technology is far more superior now!

I hope we the Customers are the real winners here not a single product nor company!


Best Regards
oma

[Chaoss]

I believe Oculus will win, they have the god of 3d and gaming on their side, John Carmack!

[Lark]

oculus will win ...

because they have valve, carmack, tridef ... and this community !!!

Also Unreal, frostbite and unity engine support. The list goes on and on. So much support from the big leaders in game development.

Its true a big company could put out a competitive product (spec wise) by the time oculus retail version hits but there's a very low chance that they would have the support from the developers or the reputation in the community to truly compete.

[Marulu]

oculus will win ...

because they have valve, carmack, tridef ... and this community !!!

Also Unreal, frostbite and unity engine support. The list goes on and on. So much support from the big leaders in game development.

Its true a big company could put out a competitive product (spec wise) by the time oculus retail version hits but there's a very low chance that they would have the support from the developers or the reputation in the community to truly compete.

+1

[WiredEarp]

oculus rift coming soon
cinemizer 3D oled
sony HMZ-T3 coming soon
vrAse coming soon
Nvidia near-eye display coming soon
ST1080
microsoft name unknown

Thats a bit of a sad list. Most of those aren't even VR HMD's, just video glasses.
The only 2 possible VR HMD contenders in there are the Rift and the vrAse.
Id prefer to see a list that at least included the two high FOV HMD's being worked on by forum members...

[Lilwolf]

btw, NONE of those other engines are going to be Oculus only! Valve will support every head set they can. Once they have Oculus support, adding another will be trivial. Heck, I thought Valve was working on their own.

More competition is good. I hope there will be at least one other good, gaming, HMD in the next 6 months other the Oculus. I'm kinda surprised we aren't seeing any Chinese knock offs yet.

I think Oculus having Carmack is a HUGE advantage at the moment. But if they keep him on mobile, it will be a huge advantage in a year+. I'm hoping he will be working a bit, even high level, with the SDK team.

[tek2222]

Don't forget Durovis Dive. It is real http://www.durovis.com


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2nf44ivSSk

[colocolo]

Don't forget Durovis Dive. It is real http://www.durovis.com

Thats nice to hear!
I wanna see a foldable version, that would fit into my pocket.
We'll see how crazy designs will evolve once foldable displays will be on the market.
Then it would be indeed possible to have a wide FOV foldable VR HMD that fits into the pocket.
6-10 years more and there wouldnt be even a performance difference between desktop and mobile.

Right now it looks like Oculus has all developers on their side.
So no room for a Sony or Microsoft HMD.
Also i really have difiiculties to imagine that Sony or Mircosoft would offer a HMD for 300$ right now.
Yeah they could, but will they? Probably much later. If they see that there's money to make then they will enter, my guess at least Sony.

[whoisonline]

Oculus Rift is ahead of the game already. But you never know, time has a way of changing things.

[turilas]

Don't forget Durovis Dive. It is real http://www.durovis.com


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2nf44ivSSk

And i maybe did find way to use it ase headtracking device in pc gaming with Arduino+SensoDuino, not sure but if someone would test it because my z1 does not fit in Dive.

[Dilip]

hi guys what's going on, the competition will start soon.
who will win?

oculus rift coming soon
cinemizer 3D oled
sony HMZ-T3 coming soon
vrAse coming soon
Nvidia near-eye display coming soon
ST1080
microsoft name unknown

who will win?

regards (deiby3D)

You missed out "InfiniteEye"
that’s actual VR and healthy opponent if it could stand head to head with oculus.

There appears to be more brighter future for this HMD as games made for RIFT could easily transformed for this HMD. kind of cross platform SDK level support is there as per makers of this hmd.

Current version of EnfiniteEye seems to be full of promises
http://www.roadtovr.com/infiniteeye-wor ... hmd-video/

They can push the horizon by using flexible displays, as only minus point i see in their HMD is its ODD LOOK due to dual panels. using flexible screens is very easy for them as their product is already dual display system from beginning and its easy for them to build 180 degree wrap around face dual display hmd regardless being 720P it would look more convincing. if they could lay their hands on flexible displays

Beside, i am agree with WiredEarp Cinemizer,Sony,Nvidia or ST1080 as none of this are VR to begin with.
"Microsoft Name Unknown" appears to me as vapourware
Nvidia is riding different stud altogether
"vrAse" are you kidding me? that’s mobile adepter and good for few minutes amusement/sbs movie watching not vr gaming.

Pocketable HMD with only single flexible cable between base and hmd and waist mountable base station with HDMI or Display over USB port of mobile support and having inbuilt battery supporting 6/8 hours play time with ability to synchronise with Smartphone is version of rift which has potential to sell millions of units i already expressed many times in past too...

[Dilip]

Where is FOISI?

Why posting about InfineteEye at any thread makes it last entry of that thread??

http://www.mtbs3d.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=140&t=18750

There is no posting of FOISI from Sep13. Did he sold out his brain child to SAMSUNG/SONY or Potential Competitor, Why such dread silence?

[Hannibalj2]

Where is FOISI?

Why posting about InfineteEye at any thread makes it last entry of that thread??

http://www.mtbs3d.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=140&t=18750

There is no posting of FOISI from Sep13. Did he sold out his brain child to SAMSUNG/SONY or Potential Competitor, Why such dread silence?

If you read the article on Road to VR, he briefly mentioned that he got to the finals of the Samsung event, but was waiting for the results. Probably, he has been pretty busy making sure that there is something worthwhile to announce like a Kickstarted or something like that. It seem they are taking InfinitEye as a serious venture, which is great!. The more competition the better fore the consumer and the evolution of the technology.

[Fredz]

The InfinitEye was presented at the London VR meetup 3 days ago, you can follow them on twitter and facebook :
https://twitter.com/InfinitEyeVR
https://www.facebook.com/InfinitEyeVR

[blazespinnaker]

I think it's pretty clear that Oculus is way ahead of everyone on the nausea front. If 3d sit down gaming nausea is an issue, they'll probably be the winner.

If watching movies casually / playing simple 3d games without being tied to your computer and without paying a lot - then players like durovis / vrase will be the winner.

Similarly if you want a mobile AR solution, durovis / vrase / openloop will be the winner.

If you have lots of money to spend, then some of the old ones in the movie watching will be the winner, sony etc.

[Hannibalj2]

Carmack is working on a mobile solution to my understanding. They probably have the resources to deliver a more robust technology than vRase or definitely than the Dive. The one area Oculus will have an issue is definitely the FOV battle. InfiniteEye, even my Portal Dual unit provide wider FOV.

In any case they have to go by a tech road-map. Version one consumer has to match a minimum requirement. They don't have to be the best in all areas but definitely have an advantage in most areas and they are. Then subsequent releases or product lines may be introduced with much improvements. One key to them *my own opinion* is to build the market ecosystem infrastructure. This if you pay attention is been currently built. It is crucial for the Rift to have this besides a hardware.

2 cents

[blazespinnaker]

I think people over estimate what people are willing to pay here. If you can get something that is good enough for 20 bux or so and you don't have to have yet another device to charge / track, than I think a smartphone HMD will be fine for movie watching / casual game play / AR.

The vast majority of people I know fit in that category. They're amused by the idea of the oculus rift, but shelling out $500+ to be a complete dork? I'm the only one in my circle willing to do that.

Who knows though, maybe Oculus is going to compete in that market, in which case they will probably win. Not sure I can see a biz strat there tho.

[Dilip]

For most of users equation will be 300~350 Usd is real sweet spot as this package has many more expenses attached with strings
like Powerful CPU+GPU large chunk of Ram and Controller and omni-TM etc.

Really it got to be below 350 USd else will loose some charm points, for international consumer at this point also equation will go to 500 USd including custom+Shipping so if cost go above this i think many will think hard before making up mind for purchase..

[unsilentwill]

Something snuck out tonight, and social media bandit that I am, I caught it.

Kotaku posted a full article about a new Avegant product, with some inaccuracies, not mentioning FOV and so on, but it's gone now. I found a picture still around, tempted to post it but if Kotaku took it down perhaps it wasn't meant to be posted yet. This is like the third time I've done this on the site, and as usual the whole thing will probably show up tomorrow, but if not I may post more about it.

I don't feel they've increased the FOV much since we looked at them last, so I'm not too worried about it for actual VR competition, but it may water down what people see VR as if they haven't tried the Rift. It's sort of a jerk move, but it'd be really effective to simulate competitor (and non like Glass) products in VR just to show the difference, and how the Rift remains all that and more (besides resolution at the moment).

[Dilip]

Avegant product is literally a nice option as it will be free from limitation arises from use of screen by eliminating screen itself.

I know nothing about this tech, but seeing product outer shell and its description and some reading between the lines, brought me to conclusion that....

its basically twin super Pico projectors having DLP chip inside and some SMD Light source... thus projecting image on your retina....rather then projecting it on glass and again view by user like Epson Moverio did.

This could be interesting option as we all know DLP can work at 100~120Hz thus fast moving images can be judder free and free of motion blur and ghost trails there are Nnumber of benifites.

I wish i could see that product prototype in real

@unsilentwill

I would be eagerly waiting for your postings in this regard for sure.

EDIT:

Ok this product is actually what i thoght it as (See my last post 11 oct 13 at that time there were no articles disclosing this tech)
http://www.mtbs3d.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=140&t=18731

Now tech unwarpping (Both are month or so after my post)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/ ... -a-screen/

http://www.tested.com/tech/459020-hands ... prototype/

So indeed this product can be considered RIFT Competition if

1) They reduce that 8 Feet distance of projection to near eye
2) They employ super fast head tracker like oculus (They are on path)

Major Advantage

They really not gonna need wrapping algoritham/SDK any thing as
its simple projected SBS image which can be easily available for all major titles with TRIDEF IGNITION & NVIDIA TV PLAY

You will also get guarnteed frame rate what you are getting (even better as this one going to be 720p - Screen Door or Pixeletion) on your current 3D system , don't need to upgrade or beefup your hardware atleast for next two years if you have recently purchased 3D vision/DDD 3D supported good system at your disposal. indeed super big advantage.

Wish this at below 500USD at retail(which is what they target) and I M IN.

[ss248]

Week late, but anyway
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-a ... atent.html

[Attreyu]

http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments ... /?sort=old

[–]colonelboots 4 points 22 hours

Sorry, to clarify, I meant Rift exclusivity seems a bit disconcerting, VR exclusivity is almost a necessity.

If other decent VR headsets come out, would you aim for games to be only compatible with the rift as a point of competition? That would be the disconcerting kind of exclusivity.

[–]palmerluckey 23 points 18 hours

VR needs more than just a headset, and there are currently a lot of different solutions to a lot of different problems in VR. Take VR input as one example: You have PrioVR, STEM, Leap, Project Holodeck, castAR, and a bevy of other devices all trying to solve 3D input in completely different ways. It would be impossible to create a game that takes full advantage of some of those devices without compromising the experience for others.

Input is an extreme example, but even differences between headsets can be huge (A game that relies on a wide FOV like Infiniteye has may be difficult to adapt to a lower FOV headset, for example). If Oculus invests in a VR game, we want to optimize it as an amazing experience on our hardware, not a decent experience on all hardware.

I am biased, but I don't think anyone is going to be able to make a better VR platform than us. We will continue to be the best.

....

Fast headtracking and large FOV are basic requirements for a decent headset, not added features. Keep in mind that there is much we have yet to disclose.

We are too early along to limit ourselves to a standard of basic thresholds. Imagine if the Rift (eventually) had eye tracking, full body tracking, galvanic vestibular stimulation, or some other feature that no other headset has. We will be building and investing in games that fully utilize our hardware for the best experience possible, not wasting development time making a crippled version for lesser hardware. You are right that there will be games that work on any hardware meeting some basic threshold, but they will not be our focus. A day will come when all VR headsets are capable of everything needed for a good experiences, but that day is not today, not next year, and probably not the year after that.

From a purely financial side, it is hard to justify using our own money (which really comes from our users, through the price of a Rift) to make games that are compatible with cheaper headsets from companies that do not have to share any of that cost. I don't want to encourage clones from companies that are not innovating or investing in VR, why would Oculus subsidize inferior hardware?

[Dilip]

http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments ... /?sort=old

[–]colonelboots 4 points 22 hours

Sorry, to clarify, I meant Rift exclusivity seems a bit disconcerting, VR exclusivity is almost a necessity.

If other decent VR headsets come out, would you aim for games to be only compatible with the rift as a point of competition? That would be the disconcerting kind of exclusivity.

[–]palmerluckey 23 points 18 hours

VR needs more than just a headset, and there are currently a lot of different solutions to a lot of different problems in VR. Take VR input as one example: You have PrioVR, STEM, Leap, Project Holodeck, castAR, and a bevy of other devices all trying to solve 3D input in completely different ways. It would be impossible to create a game that takes full advantage of some of those devices without compromising the experience for others.

Input is an extreme example, but even differences between headsets can be huge (A game that relies on a wide FOV like Infiniteye has may be difficult to adapt to a lower FOV headset, for example). If Oculus invests in a VR game, we want to optimize it as an amazing experience on our hardware, not a decent experience on all hardware.

I am biased, but I don't think anyone is going to be able to make a better VR platform than us. We will continue to be the best.

....

Fast headtracking and large FOV are basic requirements for a decent headset, not added features. Keep in mind that there is much we have yet to disclose.

We are too early along to limit ourselves to a standard of basic thresholds. Imagine if the Rift (eventually) had eye tracking, full body tracking, galvanic vestibular stimulation, or some other feature that no other headset has. We will be building and investing in games that fully utilize our hardware for the best experience possible, not wasting development time making a crippled version for lesser hardware. You are right that there will be games that work on any hardware meeting some basic threshold, but they will not be our focus. A day will come when all VR headsets are capable of everything needed for a good experiences, but that day is not today, not next year, and probably not the year after that.

From a purely financial side, it is hard to justify using our own money (which really comes from our users, through the price of a Rift) to make games that are compatible with cheaper headsets from companies that do not have to share any of that cost. I don't want to encourage clones from companies that are not innovating or investing in VR, why would Oculus subsidize inferior hardware?

I am fully agree with Palmers PoV as they did all hard work, devotion, Involvement of hard cash and their even more valuable part of life in developing something with highest passion. Why not they want things to be exclusive to their product, where their direct involvement in terms of technology and money is there. More over whatever he said about competitive products is also absolute true. All products are handling VR from very different approach to single puzzle. If oculus is helping content to shape, why they will encourage it to be general where others with those generic products are doing nothing to promote development. Oculus is not V- NGO or 3D promotional charity organization.
I see here three consequences
Case - 1:
There will be few games which will be developed under total parental guidelines and using oculus tech no how and funding too. those games will be totally locked down to RIFT as far as VR output is concerned but here also oculus can make agreement that such game can be made available to other platform after 2 years or something. As fundamentals of design and DOes and DON'Ts for VR Game going to be universal all developer required to do is TAILOR OUTPUT AGAIN and RE-ADJUST UI and HUD as per New System. This is partly VR Charity OC can involve in to for long term business plan to make VR Market (I am making this idea public here for free.(personal small part in vr charity..ha..ha) )

Case - 2:
There will be games which will be developed using oculus SDK and guidelines while making it game modular so that output can be rebuild using competitive products SDK. Here without direct involvement in terms of design or funding from oculus. Such games will be having multiple VR outputs, where developers think they can charge little premium over normal game price as they are giving it for multiple platform and native VR support. They can release different titles for different platform. Like games available on PS3+XBOX at same time of release.

I Don't see future of Case-2,,
1) Developers are lazy
2) They don't won't to do extra work, that won't necessarily extra pay.
3) VR is and will be niche product and won't be deployed by each and
Every gamer is for sure truth. Though user spectrum will broaden for
Sure.
4) We have witnessed CHILD DEATH of NATIVE 3D GAMES example
James Cameron’s AVATAR the Game


Case-3:

Game developers will adopt standard guidelines and some principle in development that game will work flawless when middleware’s like TRIDEF FOR RIFT / NVIDIA 3D VISION / VERIO PERCEPTION
can work flawlessly. This will require to follow common minimum requirement and intelligent building and placement of UI and HUD. Will also include use of compatible shaders and proper geometry and real world placement of objects.

This future is totally depend on developers desire and influence of NVIDIA /TRIDEF/ MTBS??

[Hannibalj2]

I will say this with no disrespect. Trying to have full control on anything is equal to a Monopoly.
Monopoly= Slow Evolution and hampers creative prospects

Just an opinion

[Dilip]

I will say this with no disrespect. Trying to have full control on anything is equal to a Monopoly.
Monopoly= Slow Evolution and hampers creative prospects

Absolutely correct, Now please convey this to 'SONY' for 'PS4' and 'Microsoft' for 'XBOX One'. They really have this thing in action. I see RIFT as different case as they are going to implement (If its going to be) this in their own funded projects, tell me whats wrong if i guide and fund software for my hardware then my wish to be that software exclusive to my hardware only.

This doesn't apply to software which are not directly funded or parental by OCULUS. They are anyway against closed eco system so they won't promote it.

As i elaborated, we are going to see Case-3 things where oculus is anyway not interested. Sadly i don't think Case-2 will ever happen though.

[Hannibalj2]

I will say this with no disrespect. Trying to have full control on anything is equal to a Monopoly.
Monopoly= Slow Evolution and hampers creative prospects

Absolutely correct, Now please convey this to 'SONY' for 'PS4' and 'Microsoft' for 'XBOX One'. They really have this thing in action. I see RIFT as different case as they are going to implement (If its going to be) this in their own funded projects, tell me whats wrong if i guide and fund software for my hardware then my wish to be that software exclusive to my hardware only.

This doesn't apply to software which are not directly funded or parental by OCULUS. They are anyway against closed eco system so they won't promote it.

As i elaborated, we are going to see Case-3 things where oculus is anyway not interested. Sadly i don't think Case-2 will ever happen though.

I have my own speculations which I will not comment in here since it has to do with terms like "Winners and Loosers" of the new area. And it connects to future geopolitical and social global transformation. What I will say is this, Multinational entities like Sony and Microsoft are exempt to hold monopolies because of their history and connections (also the stronger survive mentality is fomented even within the top).
Certain companies are"allowed" to grow by becoming guided by other bigger companies (not all the time though). This other companies/entities are usually huge in nature and many you might have never heard of, but are always in the lookout for the next big thing and tend to get attached to or swallow this "new" game changing companies. But besides money there are other reasons of interest.

Oculus is at the forefront, and gathering funding from much bigger companies as I have mentioned. If you were to talk to a regular person on the street about VR, the likely response is to attach VR it to a Rift. This public awareness is very important to large companies for some reason not pertinent to discuss.

When Palmer stated that Oculus will be the best VR option, well.... he may not be far from the truth. Will they be the best option forever, not sure but probably not, but who can say. My guess is that big fishes are simply looking at this small company Oculus grow and see how they manage themselves, the choices they take, and how is the public reactions they create. All of this may promote the helping hand of larger fish if there is a common interest.

Now, I have no idea if Oculus has a plan to monopolize the industry. Palmer seems like a good guy (I don't know him so I cant tell), and seems to care for the evolution of Virtual Reality. But eventually outside pressures may lead to push for a monopoly driven objective for the sake of growth and influence. Anyway, who knows time will tell, but what I know is that regardless of the realities of corporatism, we will see a lot of competitors and that can only be good for everyone!

Done with my rambling!

[Dilip]

Well that wasn't rambling

Here is best place to know, what are the other dimensions of what we consider as 'we know’

May be what you said could become reality...

[colocolo]

why shouldnt Oculus lead the field?
there were already so many start-up companies that made their billion fortune with a small group of people.
Oculus leadership comes from the technical side and that is what matters.
Look how Elon Musk who studied applied physics and business breaks out of columns doing his electric car thing although the whole crowd is after him with pitchforks.

[Hannibalj2]

why shouldnt Oculus lead the field?
there were already so many start-up companies that made their billion fortune with a small group of people.
Oculus leadership comes from the technical side and that is what matters.
Look how Elon Musk who studied applied physics and business breaks out of columns doing his electric car thing although the whole crowd is after him with pitchforks.

Leading the field, yes. Monopolizing the field, no

[Dilip]

What they are doing is promoting their hardware. They waited for interesting games to foster over fertile vr soil offered by them as it appear to them that there are not many they started cultivating them self by providing funds+tech support

I don't think they could Monopolize VR, What they could monopolize is 'few games' that genuinely offer 'great experience' over their hardware.

Those games won't be only in market offering VR unless there is no wish to develop anything in VR among others, if such trend is there how long they can fund projects from their pockets.

[Hannibalj2]

Hehe, anyway I'm making a game for the Rift!!! I love my Rift and cant wait for the next version! I hope they can provide support to the Cryengine 3!

[colocolo]

Hehe, anyway I'm making a game for the Rift!!! I love my Rift and cant wait for the next version! I hope they can provide support to the Cryengine 3!

According to Palmer Luckey they are supporting it already out of box.

[youtube-hd]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEVLtBH2vN0&noredirect=1[/youtube-hd]

[Hannibalj2]

I have been doing some searching on this matter but actually it doesn't seem like a perfect solution just yet.
I believe Cryengine version 3.5.3 there was some support and sort of on 3.5.4. To my understanding after those releases there is no more support for the Rift. Also it was never perfect. This is what I found out so far

[molton]

I think the video gaming community should support Oculus over other companies because they pretty much brought VR back from near death and they are not Sony or some giant corporation and they don't act like it, they offer development kits for $300 which is like a fraction of what those things usually cost to promote independant developers that include everything you need to make a game including a 4-month Unity trial.

An open system would be great, which we deffinetly won't see if sony or any other big company is setting how things are, hopefully Oculus makes an open system for supporting other HMD's, the way the source code and gui messages talk about "HMD's" and not "Oculus Rifts" is encouraging.

[vrdude]

When you really think about it, we all win!!! With this truly being the dawn of immersive VR experiences, it can only get better as more players enter the market place. I am a huge believer in the Rift even though I still have yet to order DK1 (will be ordering it on 2/1 and I truly believe that it will be, " The Next Big Thing!" But this is just the beginning.... AS more companies start to get involved in the upcoming VR revolution, we will see this driving other technologies to bring us better and better experiences until one day, we have a real Holodeck.