Facebook VR wristband powered via 'brain signals'(bbc.co.uk)
bbc.co.uk
Facebook VR wristband powered via 'brain signals'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-56486802
1 comments
> I am aware of other devices like Valve Index, but that's still 'VR 1.0' technology. Oculus is already on 'VR 1.977' and Valve isn't going to catch up.
What are you measuring with your 1.0 and 1.977?
I love VR so I have a Rift S, an Index, and a Quest 2. The Index is superior to the Oculus devices in pretty much every way but wireless (for 2 hours, anyway, until the Quest 2's battery dies when brand new without external battery mods) and price. Comfort, glasses compatibility, IPD compatibility, sound quality, FOV, refresh rate, graphics quality, tracking precision, controller capability, and VR home experience are all better with the Index and SteamVR.
You can boost graphics (but not refresh rate) on the Quest 2 by attaching a link cable (costs extra) to a gaming PC, but then you've just lost wireless play and the cost savings of not needing the gaming PC, the only two good things going for the Quest 2. And the budget price of the Quest 2 is already deceptive because everyone ends up having to buy extra aftermarket accessories like a more functional head strap, controller knuckle straps, an external battery, and lens ring bumpers.
It's a fairly common story that Beat Saber players who switch to an Index from something else improve their high scores significantly basically over night because of a night/day difference in controller tracking and display refresh rate.
What are you measuring with your 1.0 and 1.977?
I love VR so I have a Rift S, an Index, and a Quest 2. The Index is superior to the Oculus devices in pretty much every way but wireless (for 2 hours, anyway, until the Quest 2's battery dies when brand new without external battery mods) and price. Comfort, glasses compatibility, IPD compatibility, sound quality, FOV, refresh rate, graphics quality, tracking precision, controller capability, and VR home experience are all better with the Index and SteamVR.
You can boost graphics (but not refresh rate) on the Quest 2 by attaching a link cable (costs extra) to a gaming PC, but then you've just lost wireless play and the cost savings of not needing the gaming PC, the only two good things going for the Quest 2. And the budget price of the Quest 2 is already deceptive because everyone ends up having to buy extra aftermarket accessories like a more functional head strap, controller knuckle straps, an external battery, and lens ring bumpers.
It's a fairly common story that Beat Saber players who switch to an Index from something else improve their high scores significantly basically over night because of a night/day difference in controller tracking and display refresh rate.
You are making a common conflation when talking about VR. Better specs does not mean better technology. Sure, the Index looks better on paper right now, but in 2-3 years it will be an unthinkable purchase.
There is a limit to how high the resolution can be bumped in order to realistically run on consumer PCs. Oculus knows this and is dumping heaps of money trying to make foveated rendering happen and squeezing every drop of performance they can out of their rendering pipeline. What can Valve do to compete? Not much. They can bump the resolution anyway but then it becomes a device for super high-end PCs. One breakthrough is all it will take to deprecate the Index.
Plus, we're talking about a $1000 device here. This price point locks out a lot of people. Yeah yeah, I've heard it before, Oculus collects data to subsidise costs, whatever. It doesn't matter. Their devices are more competitive and that's what will capture the market.
It might sound like I'm shilling here but I would point you to my original comment. I don't want Oculus to rule. But they're about to put on the crown.
There is a limit to how high the resolution can be bumped in order to realistically run on consumer PCs. Oculus knows this and is dumping heaps of money trying to make foveated rendering happen and squeezing every drop of performance they can out of their rendering pipeline. What can Valve do to compete? Not much. They can bump the resolution anyway but then it becomes a device for super high-end PCs. One breakthrough is all it will take to deprecate the Index.
Plus, we're talking about a $1000 device here. This price point locks out a lot of people. Yeah yeah, I've heard it before, Oculus collects data to subsidise costs, whatever. It doesn't matter. Their devices are more competitive and that's what will capture the market.
It might sound like I'm shilling here but I would point you to my original comment. I don't want Oculus to rule. But they're about to put on the crown.
> in 2-3 years it will be
Uh...In 3 years it will be 5 years old. I'm not sure why you think that's a worthwhile comparison.
> What can Valve do to compete? Not much.
It's super weird that you talk like Valve isn't a juggernaut making billions in revenue per year.
Uh...In 3 years it will be 5 years old. I'm not sure why you think that's a worthwhile comparison.
> What can Valve do to compete? Not much.
It's super weird that you talk like Valve isn't a juggernaut making billions in revenue per year.
I am aware of other devices like Valve Index, but that's still 'VR 1.0' technology. Oculus is already on 'VR 1.977' and Valve isn't going to catch up.
There is simply no other player in the industry putting in the kind of money and research that Oculus is. At this rate, they're going to dominate consumer VR and kill the dream for cautious and privacy-conscious people.