Skip to main content
PatimPatam
Up and Coming
January 13, 2014

Should Oculus bundle motion controllers with every Rift?

Hi there!

I've mentioned this a couple times back around September, but now that it's official that Oculus VR is focusing on a seated experience and that external optical tracking looks likely for CV1 i think it's become relevant again..

Also posted a comment on Reddit the other day, just thought i would create a new thread here to see if we can get a bit more feedback.
http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/1uw0nl/the_next_big_hurdle_for_vr_getting_your_hands_in

Here's a slightly edited version of my reply to the OP:
"PatimPatam" wrote:

Basically, i believe that the company in the best position to put our hands inside the game is actually Oculus VR itself.

I would love to have an affordable haptic feedback glove, but for the 1st generation of consumer VR i don't think we really need one; a motion controller similar to the PS-Move but where each finger rests in a separate analog button (with optional force feedback) should be enough to simulate our hands. For instance I can imagine it having the shape of a prism or a dumbbell, with several LEDs on both ends.

Having already an external camera for positional tracking this type of controller should be very cheap to produce for Oculus (basically just plastic, a few LEDs, a bluetooth transmitter, and one of the awesome IMUs they already developed to use inside the headset).

I think Oculus could perfectly bundle 2 of these controllers with every Rift sold, without adding more than $40 or $50 to the final price.

I know it may not sound like super-exciting high-tech at first, but the fact that EVERY Rift user would have the same VR input would make a MASSIVE difference. Developers could create VR games and applications with very intuitive interfaces from day 1 knowing that there is a standard input shared by all users.


And here's a very rough sketch i made to have an idea of what i mean. On top of that there should probably be a strap that goes around the back of your hand, so the controller stays in place even with the palm open.



Also optionally there could be a thumbstick instead of the thumb button, but i don't really think it's necessary since i believe avatar movement/rotation could be archived in more intuitive ways, like pressing a button and using positional tracking (lean forward to move forward for instance). Thumbsticks for movement have become quite standard between gamers but i don't think they are that intuitive for the average person.

More on that here:
http://www.mtbs3d.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=140&t=18694


Obviously the main technical difficulty with this solution would be how to differentiate controller LEDs from HMD LEDs. The more trivial approach would probably be using a visible spectrum camera instead of infrared and have different colors for each controller but that has it's own set of disadvantages.. anyway i think with the team of computer vision experts at Oculus this should be certainly doable.

I'm also quite certain that a system like this (if used at an optimal distance from the camera) could be much more accurate than alternatives like magnetic tracking (mainly due to the magnetic distortion problem).

At the same time systems like the STEM or PrioVR could still be useful for scenarios where the user wants to move around with more freedom within a confined space, or inside omni threadmills.


I've seen quite a few people complaining about the external camera solution.. Am i the only one INSANELY excited about it?? I believe this could potentially bring us one step closer to the Oasis console.

I honestly think this should be a no-brainer for Oculus, and actually i'm betting they already have some hand-controller internal prototypes; then again maybe i'm wrong :-)

Thoughts?


EDIT:

Like i mentioned later in this thread, if occlusion is too troublesome to sort out with only the existing front camera, a 2nd inside-out camera with a wide FOV could be used on the headset to help track the controllers. If the HMD is blocked by the controllers, the relative position between the external camera and the HMD could be calculated integrating the relative position between camera and controllers and the relative position between controllers and HMD.

Maybe this inside-out camera could be used at the same time for pass-through functionality similar to Gear VR. Obviously this would add both weight and cost to the HMD, but i don't see it as a show-stopper.

    132 replies

    Show previous replies
    McKnight90
    Participant
    January 16, 2014
    "cerebral" wrote:
    For the sake of comfort two simple one hand controller(wire/wireless) would be a good start for a bundle.
    Having the hands forced to grab a controller isn' relaxing.
    For a seated VR experience you want to relax on an armchair.
    Maybe we'll see some gloves bundled. Palmer mentioned in HipHipgamer interview that they have a few asses in their sleeves. :D
    PatimPatamAuthor
    Up and Coming
    January 16, 2014
    Thanks for the support mrgreen, it helps me feel less lonely :-)

    McKnight90, i managed to read cerebral's comment just fine the first time around!
    PatimPatamAuthor
    Up and Coming
    January 17, 2014
    Ok, just a little bit more gratuitous speculation on my part..

    It seems pretty much confirmed that Sony's VR headset is NOT the HMZ with tracking presented at CES 2014:
    http://thesonicreblog.com/valve-vr-and-oculus/
    http://thesonicreblog.com/yes-playstation-vr-not-hmz/

    Incidentally, I spoke with a dev from a major gaming company the other day and got him to spill the beans on the PlayStation VR headset. Lots of pleasing info. VR, at this point, is more about these companies thinking forward and long-term about the medium as a whole. This stuff is in good hands.

    The devs I spoke to talked about the actual PlayStation VR headset. They described Super Stardust VR to me and explicitly talked about how it was different than the HMZ line. Sony has been working on VR for ages, longer than people realize. They’re pretty thrilled to see VR taking off just as their tech is maturing and are interested in the long-term future of the medium, but just their own headset

    By the looks of it, it is indeed going to be a serious competitor to the Oculus Rift.

    Now, if Sony brings VR to the PS4 i am quite certain that they are going to take full advantage of their brand new PS4Eye camera and their PS Move controllers for input. It's also safe to assume they will create PS4 VR bundles with everything you need in the box and price it as low as they can.

    So.. one more reason for Oculus VR to take a good crack at this if they want to remain competitive against Sony's incoming VR solution.
    mrgreen72
    Inspiring
    January 17, 2014
    "PatimPatam" wrote:
    Ok, just a little bit more gratuitous speculation on my part..

    It seems pretty much confirmed that Sony's VR headset is NOT the HMZ with tracking presented at CES 2014:
    http://thesonicreblog.com/valve-vr-and-oculus/
    http://thesonicreblog.com/yes-playstation-vr-not-hmz/

    Incidentally, I spoke with a dev from a major gaming company the other day and got him to spill the beans on the PlayStation VR headset. Lots of pleasing info. VR, at this point, is more about these companies thinking forward and long-term about the medium as a whole. This stuff is in good hands.

    The devs I spoke to talked about the actual PlayStation VR headset. They described Super Stardust VR to me and explicitly talked about how it was different than the HMZ line. Sony has been working on VR for ages, longer than people realize. They’re pretty thrilled to see VR taking off just as their tech is maturing and are interested in the long-term future of the medium, but just their own headset

    By the looks of it, it is indeed going to be a serious competitor to the Oculus Rift.

    Now, if Sony brings VR to the PS4 i am quite certain that they are going to take full advantage of their brand new PS4Eye camera and their PS Move controllers for input. It's also safe to assume they will create PS4 VR bundles with everything you need in the box and price it as low as they can.

    So.. one more reason for Oculus VR to take a good crack at this if they want to remain competitive against Sony's incoming VR solution.


    I don't know... This reads more like the wishful thinking of a stealthy Sony fanboy trying to look reasonable. Besides, even ignoring the fact that the PS4 lacks horsepower, a VR HMD designed to work with it would pretty much have to be wireless unless you wanna drag a 12' cable across the living room. Unless Sony is building it for PC? Not gonna hold my breath.
    PatimPatamAuthor
    Up and Coming
    January 17, 2014
    "mrgreen72" wrote:
    I don't know... This reads more like the wishful thinking of a stealthy Sony fanboy trying to look reasonable.

    Oops you got me! No. Just joking.

    Sorry if that's how it sounds (you may be right btw), but nothing further from the truth.. Whatever Sony brings to the table for the PS4, it will pale in comparison to the consumer Rift paired with a couple of R9 390Xs (or whatever is cool next year) that i'm planning to get; especially if things like Mantle take off. Oh my, now i'm starting to sound like an AMD fanboy. :-D

    Obviously the PS4 won't be able to deliver awesome AAA-type graphics in VR, but as long as they keep them fairly simple (think stylized "Tron type" for example) i think it should be more than capable of doing anti-aliased stereo 1080p @ 90fps; the PS3 was already capable of simple graphics running at 1080p @ 60fps, see "Wipeout HD" for instance.

    Also you can't ignore the power (and money) of Sony for creating 1st party software that really pushes the HW.

    "mrgreen72" wrote:

    a VR HMD designed to work with it would pretty much have to be wireless unless you wanna drag a 12' cable across the living room.

    Don't see the big problem of having a cable from the console to the sofa, we had it for many generations (i know, it's hard to go back).


    Anyhow, this last rant of mine was more a case of trying to prepare for the "worst case scenario"..

    TL;DR:
    We need sweet and cheap motion controls for the PC pronto, and i think Oculus is in the perfect position to deliver!
    cerebral
    Participant
    January 17, 2014
    Since i suspect hand and arm tracking would be also for 180° why not sell another camera?
    How much can a second camera cost?
    Or as an addition? That way you couldn't make any mistake in purchasing sth wrong.
    http://vrdisplay.blogspot.de/
    alejux
    Up and Coming
    January 17, 2014
    I think the answer to the thread's question is a thunderous YES.

    I'm currently designing some VR content, and I find it EXTREMELY limited not being able to count on a hand control scheme. Everything in VR begs you to interact with the environment, either touching something, aiming or doing some basic motion.

    But how can I create this kind of interaction, when a good number of my customers will have either keyboards and mice, or old fashion gaming console controls?

    I really think, that with the optical tracking solution they created for the head positioning, it wouldn't be difficult to extend it to a simple hand controller, such as the PS Move.

    I feel that if Oculus doesn't release it's consumer version with a VR consistent hand control scheme, then the consumers will end up suffering due to limited interaction in the 1st generation VR content.
    mrgreen72
    Inspiring
    January 17, 2014
    "PatimPatam" wrote:
    Sorry if that's how it sounds (you may be right btw), but nothing further from the truth..

    Sorry, I wasn't talking about you but about the blog you linked to. Unless that's also you? :lol:

    "PatimPatam" wrote:
    Don't see the big problem of having a cable from the console to the sofa, we had it for many generations (i know, it's hard to go back).

    You're right. But it wasn't attached to our heads... I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's not something I see Sony doing in this day and age.

    But who knows, maybe they manage to pull off a wireless solution!
    Tbone
    Up and Coming
    January 17, 2014
    Yes, this should be a no-brainer for Oculus for several reasons. In a recent interview, however, they said that VR input was very difficult and that it was a long-term goal. They seem to be hoping that game pads will be enough for now, but I think it's going to cause a lot of trouble for VR. Some reasons...

    1. Positional tracking of the head and hands should be unified to work together. Not only do you need to track all three points, but you need to track them in relation to each other. If your hand tracking (i.e. STEM) doesn't know where your head is, then it won't know if you are leaning left in your chair or pushing left on a stick to strafe. If it's the stick, your hands should follow your body. If it's leaning, then your hands should stay where you are. You can only achieve 1:1 if all three points can track each other (head, hand, hand), and I believe that requires using the SAME system.

    2. If the Rift is packaged with a camera, then comparisons will be drawn to the Kinect. Uninformed consumers will expect functionality that is similar to the Kinect and will be confused and disappointed when it doesn't track any of their body. Providing motion controllers will eliminate a majority of these complaints, since the important upper body tracking will be complete.

    3. As mentioned, game developers want to develop VR games. Right now they have to choose whether to develop a game that uses a game pad or take a risk and develop for the STEM system or PrioVR or whatever else comes down the tubes. Most won't bother to add support for these third party controllers. Those who do so an exclusive manner will be catering to an extremely limited crowd (i.e. The Gallery). As a consumer, I'm stuck deciding if I want to buy 3 or 4 different third-party peripherals in order to play the games that exclusively support them. Meanwhile game developers will complain and consumers will complain and no one wins - the system is too scattered.

    At the very least, Oculus should develop motion controllers that work with their current tracking system and then make it open source so that third-party developers can take it and run with it. Sixense could add LEDs for increased precision. Hardware devs could create swords, guns, attachments, and whatever that works with the optical tracking solution. I'm sure there's a very complicated answer as to why this isn't currently possible, but I think Oculus should consider it a bigger priority than it already does. I think a lot of early adopters and early VR devs are going to get burned on what looks like will be a VR input fiasco.
    The Furious Angels - an Oculus Rift Online Gaming Community!
    alejux
    Up and Coming
    January 17, 2014
    "Tbone" wrote:
    Yes, this should be a no-brainer for Oculus for several reasons. In a recent interview, however, they said that VR input was very difficult and that it was a long-term goal. They seem to be hoping that game pads will be enough for now, but I think it's going to cause a lot of trouble for VR. Some reasons...

    1. Positional tracking of the head and hands should be unified to work together. Not only do you need to track all three points, but you need to track them in relation to each other. If your hand tracking (i.e. STEM) doesn't know where your head is, then it won't know if you are leaning left in your chair or pushing left on a stick to strafe. If it's the stick, your hands should follow your body. If it's leaning, then your hands should stay where you are. You can only achieve 1:1 if all three points can track each other (head, hand, hand), and I believe that requires using the SAME system.

    2. If the Rift is packaged with a camera, then comparisons will be drawn to the Kinect. Uninformed consumers will expect functionality that is similar to the Kinect and will be confused and disappointed when it doesn't track any of their body. Providing motion controllers will eliminate a majority of these complaints, since the important upper body tracking will be complete.

    3. As mentioned, game developers want to develop VR games. Right now they have to choose whether to develop a game that uses a game pad or take a risk and develop for the STEM system or PrioVR or whatever else comes down the tubes. Most won't bother to add support for these third party controllers. Those who do so an exclusive manner will be catering to an extremely limited crowd (i.e. The Gallery). As a consumer, I'm stuck deciding if I want to buy 3 or 4 different third-party peripherals in order to play the games that exclusively support them. Meanwhile game developers will complain and consumers will complain and no one wins - the system is too scattered.

    At the very least, Oculus should develop motion controllers that work with their current tracking system and then make it open source so that third-party developers can take it and run with it. Sixense could add LEDs for increased precision. Hardware devs could create swords, guns, attachments, and whatever that works with the optical tracking solution. I'm sure there's a very complicated answer as to why this isn't currently possible, but I think Oculus should consider it a bigger priority than it already does. I think a lot of early adopters and early VR devs are going to get burned on what looks like will be a VR input fiasco.


    I agree with all your points.
    Show more replies
    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement