The Occulus Rift sounds great and all, and being the first mass produced VR headset, it's important. But I suspect it won't be any good for the first couple generations. For one, it doesn't have full peripheral vision, which I feel is the most important feature of VR. Think about this: why are are almost all sports games in 3rd person? Because in 1st person you'd be at a huge disadvantage due to lack of peripheral vision. In a football game, somebody comes at you from the side, you don't know he's there, and you get tackled.
When the 2.0 version comes out with full peripheral vision and, hopefully HD resolution, I'm sure I'll jump onboard. Til then, I'll let everybody else be the guinea pigs.
@shantd This version does actually have 180° degree vision :)
1 - Full 180 degree vision
2 - Full HD resolution
3 - Top notch 3d integration
4 - Complete game integration/compatibility, meaning you can use the OR on any console or PC, with any game.
Perhaps, at this rate, it will be sooner. Can't wait til we're there!
- 720P may technically be HD, but with 4k just around the corner, 1080 should be the minimal bar for the forseeable future.
- On the FOV, everything I'm reading online talks about 110 FOV. Can you guys offer a source for 180?
- I do agree, it's the game/console/PC integration that will be the biggest hurdle because developers have to recode their games from the ground up to work with the OR. From the wiki:
"There is also no native support for Mac OSX and Microsoft on the device, as the system uses its own home baked development environment; forcing developers to code or recode their games from the ground up."
Hopefully that will change at some point.
@shantd @STARWARSFANYANN Well I know they fore sure have 720p resolutions which qualifies as HD and they are pushing to get it up to 1080, but they haven't confirmed it and they already said it might not happen but it is still HD none the less. Apparently it does have full 180 degree FOV and it has full 3D support which, according to the tech demos, is quite good. The only thing left is support for most games (not all can take advantage of the tech in a rational way, look at games like Civilization) and console integration which mostly comes down to the developers along with Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft.
Have you even watched the video describing how it works? You're going to argue that 110 FOV left and right is not enough for right now? That's brilliant. Don't get me wrong, if they manage to have a full round 180 FOV some day, that would be amazing, but this is still pretty damn amazing, and better than any monitor experience can provide (especially for shooters).
This is going to be tailored more towards FPS games, ironically, which tend to only have up to 90 FOV anyway. Even in a sports game, 110 in FPS would be crazy to try, but I don't think anyone will be playing sports games outside third person anytime soon anyway, because it gives more than just a peripheral view advantage. You can also see more behind you, which is the primary reason people will want to continue playing it that way.
Having said/ranted about that, buyers of these are probably going to stick with games that have been tailored for it anyway.
@Fanible @shantd Ofcourse I've seen the videos, and I'm not arguing that it's not impressive. Ofcourse it is. But I still see it as the first baby step of a massive staircase. Normally I'm an early adopter of technology. That is, I'll pay stupid prices to try the first generation of tech. But I don't see that happening with the Occulus Rift. The technology is too early in its development cycle even for me. Besides the reasons I stated, you mentioned another one: games. It's not compatible with existing games, and of the list of games that are compatible, Star Citizen is the only one I have any interest in at the moment.
Having said all that, I do believe VR headsets are the future of gaming. The only way you're going to get full 180 degree FOV is with a head set (I don't see TVs that wrap around your head as being particularly feesible).