Existing Rift CV1 Owners: Will you plan to purchase the Rift-S ??

[Zenbane]

The news is out, the new face of Rift is now the Rift-S:

https://www.oculus.com/rift-s/

Some new info came in that sheds more light on Rift-S:

a good laptop can run it

Rubin is referring to the combination of cross-play and cross-buy that will be another pillar to Oculus' messaging going forward. Quest users will be able to play multiplayer titles against Rift and Rift S owners, and the company will be encouraging developers to put titles on both stores if possible -- even enabling them to allow players to buy one version and automatically own the other.
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2019-03-20-oculus-its-no-longer-a-burden-to-get-into-virtual-...

Here's the best YouTube video on the topic, with a great interview with Nate Mitchell from Oculus:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vtryRHVg_I

The Rift-S seems to be a refresh of the Rift product-line, and its primary target audience seems more aligned with "new PCVR users," as opposed to alluring existing Rift CV1 owners to partake in a long awaited upgrade. So my question is... how many of you Rift CV1 owners are planning on purchasing the Rift-S based on the information we have now??

[Anonymous]

CrashFu said:

Gamers spend years crying about the resolution needing to be higher, so Oculus gives us an additional 200x240 per eye...  and people act like it's a big deal that they couldn't squeeze in another 120x160 to match the Vive Pro?

This resolution upgrade is more than halfway between the Rift and Vive Pro, a significant increase; and yet the Rift-S is only going to cost $400 compared to $1300 for the Vive Pro.  THAT'S. A BIG. DEAL.

How is that "significant increase"? That is a tiny bump - not "significant increase".

[CrashFu]

Mradr said:

CrashFu said:

Gamers spend years crying about the resolution needing to be higher, so Oculus gives us an additional 200x240 per eye...  and people act like it's a big deal that they couldn't squeeze in another 120x160 to match the Vive Pro?

This resolution upgrade is more than halfway between the Rift and Vive Pro, a significant increase; and yet the Rift-S is only going to cost $400 compared to $1300 for the Vive Pro.  THAT'S. A BIG. DEAL.

How is that "significant increase"? That is a tiny bump - not "significant increase".

It's a larger increase from the original Rift than the difference between the Rift-S and $1000+ VR systems such as the Vive Pro.

So if that's "a tiny bump" to you, then that means there's only HALF a tiny bump's difference between the Rift-S graphics and the most expensive VR systems on the market! Thanks for putting into perspective just what an incredible device it is, for the price. :wink:

[Sabrejet]

I recommended to a friend to check out the S as he doesn't have a Rift yet, but so far I'm super happy with my Rift.  Some of the S features I would like, but not so much to spend all over again.

[inovator]

Yes I can't spend my money fast enough 

[Anonymous]

CrashFu said:

Mradr said:

CrashFu said:

Gamers spend years crying about the resolution needing to be higher, so Oculus gives us an additional 200x240 per eye...  and people act like it's a big deal that they couldn't squeeze in another 120x160 to match the Vive Pro?

This resolution upgrade is more than halfway between the Rift and Vive Pro, a significant increase; and yet the Rift-S is only going to cost $400 compared to $1300 for the Vive Pro.  THAT'S. A BIG. DEAL.

How is that "significant increase"? That is a tiny bump - not "significant increase".

It's a larger increase from the original Rift than the difference between the Rift-S and $1000+ VR systems such as the Vive Pro.

So if that's "a tiny bump" to you, then that means there's only HALF a tiny bump's difference between the Rift-S graphics and the most expensive VR systems on the market! Thanks for putting into perspective just what an incredible device it is, for the price. :wink:

There is a difference though in why that cost $1000+ system - that doesn't explain the screens - so unless you can break out the cost - I dont think that argument holds as well as you might think it does though.

Cost of screens come down and there for so does higher pixel count of per dollar goes up. Rift S is taking advance of that why Pro took it early for having it then/now. That would still be consider a smaller jump considering how much of a bump you would get if it was price at 1000$. So are you saying that the Vive pro resolution is 2x better than current Rift S? If so - then wow why pick it up at all LOL.

It's a trade off - but you can't say it's a "significant increase" when it's only a percent higher than from before when we have higher pixel count screens already out there. Maybe a "modest boost" would be a better term here - the reason I am making a deal over it is - it's not the resolution - its RGB and the lenses doing all the work - not the small jump in resolution. 

I think using the phrase "significant increase" would be a bit miss leading to someone that is reading these post and trying to judge. I mean "significant increase" could be like 720p to 1080p - but is it really that big of a differences in the world of 2k, 4k, and 8k? Would you still play at 1080p if 2k was a common place - 4k being the 2k replacement, and 8k being the high end 4k is today with wish list of 12k just around the corner? Granted that is a bit of a future look, but my point is that you have to take  things in view on the time it was release to price. Time has move on from the Vive Pro already considering they already demo off (From the same company) a 4k OLED display they was already selling with their 8k going on sell in just a few months of that.

At the end of the day the "significant increase" isn't from the small bump in pixels - its the lenses and the use of full RGB witch is what we wanted - just not using LCD but with duel OLED witch the Quest proves that those screens do exist.

[BeastyBaiter]

CrashFu said:

Gamers spend years crying about the resolution needing to be higher, so Oculus gives us an additional 200x240 per eye...  and people act like it's a big deal that they couldn't squeeze in another 120x160 to match the Vive Pro?

This resolution upgrade is more than halfway between the Rift and Vive Pro, a significant increase; and yet the Rift-S is only going to cost $400 compared to $1300 for the Vive Pro.  THAT'S. A BIG. DEAL.

For people to see that and decide to just whine about the literally imperceptible drop in max framerate or still not having FoV that extends into your peripheral vision  (which would require too many tradeoffs, especially in terms of cost, for virtually no practical benefit)  that's just being pretentious for the sake of it.

You can also get that resolution upgrade with a $400 Samsung Odyssey+ or the $400 Oculus Quest. Alternatively, there's the new HP Reverb running double the resolution for only a little more ($600). That's the issue. The Rift CV1 and Vive 1 aren't the only HMD's on the market. Compared to the originals, yes, it's a sizable improvement. But it's a downgrade compared to literally any other mainstream VR headset on the market. The Rift S does have some very nice features, but you simply cannot reasonably claim that the screens are among them. The Rift S's screens were obsolete 2 years ago and it isn't even out yet.

[CrashFu]

I don't know much about all those random third-party devices like the HP Reverb, but I question whether the high specs are going to be worth anything if you can't do anything with the device;  How many VR software devs are actually including support for the HP Reverb?  How many have even heard of it?  Are enough people buying this thing for any software dev to even care?

Or is it just supposed to automatically work with anything developed for other VR devices?  Not that I'd put much trust in that sort of thing.

[Zenbane]

HP Reverb piggybacks off of WMR so integration should be fine. But there is a lot of Frankenstein hackery required to make it as viable as the Rift CV1 in terms of a "complete package."

[nangu]

Not for me as an upgrade. I think Rift S will be a very good product for new VR adopters though.

[Fazz]

Until I've seen more hands on reviews I'm really stumped not knowing which headset to get. Rift -S/Oculus Quest/HP Reverb. I like my sims like IL2, but with only having a Geforce 1080, I don't think I'll get to play all these sims on a HP Reverb due to it's high resolution. If I had a Geforce 2080 Ti, I think I'd go with HP Reverb, but even then it would just be to play the odd sim if tracking turns out to be bad. 

Having seen the comparisons screen between Oculus Go and Vive Pro in another thread now, I have to admit the Oculus GO looks better then the Vive Pro. Rift -S will use the same screens as an Oculus Go, so which do you think looks best? I definitely reckon it's the Oculus GO, because it has better colours, better blacks and less screen door. It also has less God Rays.