cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Dont worry rift s is not dead yet!

inovator
Consultant
The quest will not be as good on PC because  of latency and will not look as good because of compression due to the USB connection. It will be interesting to hear the reviews of how big of a difference. A 90 refresh rate was considered but was not done because the FCC would have to recertify it.  I have both the rift and the quest so I guess I'll stick with using both for a bit. Wi fi wirless connection was considered but it was felt quality could not be a given. I was a bit disappointed about the PC quality spoken of but over time maybe it will go 100% the other way. Oculus always strives to improve.
44 REPLIES 44

RedRizla
Honored Visionary
Funny enough software is exactly what I was thinking about when they announced that Oculus Quest can be tethered to a PC. What happens if they create games like Lone Echo and someone who purchases an Oculus Quest doesn't have a PC? This makes me wonder if there is going to be a separate library for Oculus Quest PC -VR games?

Anonymous
Not applicable

kevinw729 said:


Spuzzum said:

The biggest reason to get a Quest over a Rift-S...Beat Saber 360 mode...it's going to be a Quest exclusive. That's going to sell a lot more Quests because of it.



Yes, making that a exclusive will mint Beat Games a lot - wonder how they will be able to compete with the other Beat-Style games coming out, or if brand loyalty is enough.

The main issue for me is if you have a high-end PC do you look at Quest as a casual VR immersion tool, or if you look at a Valve Index to complete the set - or a half way house of a HTC Cosmos. But for OculusVR the big question is did OC6 just create for Rift-S, the shortest ever product launch in Facebook history?

Many of the high end PC enthusiasts that are already into VR, are flight and racing sim players mostly. This group undoubtedly will continue to migrate to Reverb, Index, Cosmos, and some even Pimax. The Quest technology would have to improve significantly ( maybe in Quest 2) to capture their attention.

Some like myself, that also enjoy many other games/experiences with hand controllers, will certainly take a serious look at grabbing a Quest. Being able to tether and then have un-tethered whenever in the mood will be very appealing, along with the way cool upcoming hand/finger tracking. While most of my gaming time is in flight sims, I enjoy enough of the other that I would fall into this category, so I will be picking up a Quest here soon.

But - the big question and that is the one Oculus is focused on, is how well will the Quest line end up adding to the number of VR enthusiasts and really grow the market. That is certainly what they are after, rather than trying to capture more of the PC-VR market that already exists. And by giving the device ability to tether, it will also eventually be one that also caters to casual PC-VR gamers. 

RedRizla said:
Funny enough software is exactly what I was thinking about when they announced that Oculus Quest can be tethered to a PC. What happens if they create games like Lone Echo and someone who purchases an Oculus Quest doesn't have a PC? This makes me wonder if there is going to be a separate library for Oculus Quest PC -VR games?

That's exactly the kind of question I had too. And cross-buy is going to get a whole lot more confusing in the minds of users.... if not developers also.

Does a user with both Rift and Quest start thinking about which version to go for depending how much a particular game benefits from untethering? or how much they go travelling with their headset?

If dual headset owners start to buy just the Rift version of a game because it now works on both headsets.. or if Quest owners just buy the Rift version because they think it's better or because they think they may get a Rift in the future... would that affect the likelihood of a developer producing a dedicated Quest version?

I'm getting more questions the more I think about it.

inovator
Consultant
If a fiber cable is going to cost 200 dollars  then your quest is now 600 dollars 700 for the 128 gig. Many quest users are casual users and don't want to spend money for a high end PC. When I made this thread I didn't know how much it cost. That cost makes me double down on this thread title. 

Anonymous
Not applicable

inovator said:

If a fiber cable is going to cost 200 dollars  then your quest is now 600 dollars 700 for the 128 gig. Many quest users are casual users and don't want to spend money for a high end PC. When I made this thread I didn't know how much it cost. That cost makes me double down on this thread title. 

Voodoo stated in a recent video that he asked Oculus the question at OC6 of how much this cable will cost from Oculus, and they told him 79 USD.

inovator
Consultant

dburne said:


inovator said:

If a fiber cable is going to cost 200 dollars  then your quest is now 600 dollars 700 for the 128 gig. Many quest users are casual users and don't want to spend money for a high end PC. When I made this thread I didn't know how much it cost. That cost makes me double down on this thread title. 

Voodoo stated in a recent video that he asked Oculus the question at OC6 of how much this cable will cost from Oculus, and they told him 79 USD.


That's not bad. It makes sense for them to make something affordable. 

It'll probably be included in future packages, à la Rift early adoption & Touch

Anonymous
Not applicable


RedRizla said:
Funny enough software is exactly what I was thinking about when they announced that Oculus Quest can be tethered to a PC. What happens if they create games like Lone Echo and someone who purchases an Oculus Quest doesn't have a PC? This makes me wonder if there is going to be a separate library for Oculus Quest PC -VR games?

That's exactly the kind of question I had too. And cross-buy is going to get a whole lot more confusing in the minds of users.... if not developers also.

Does a user with both Rift and Quest start thinking about which version to go for depending how much a particular game benefits from untethering? or how much they go travelling with their headset?

If dual headset owners start to buy just the Rift version of a game because it now works on both headsets.. or if Quest owners just buy the Rift version because they think it's better or because they think they may get a Rift in the future... would that affect the likelihood of a developer producing a dedicated Quest version?

I'm getting more questions the more I think about it.



For software - I think that is still easy to figure out as the customer.

You have two stores - keep the split like they are now with the store only on that device aka, ppl with Quest wont be able to buy PC games if they don't own a PC in the first place to purchase from that app/store front.

For the store it self - if the game supported on both - then you display as purchase for both platform - if the game is split - then you still have to show that you need to purchase it for PC. Now, this will put a lot more pressure on game devs though that their games can't be split like that very often without a lot of kick back. If you are going to support mobile - then you must support mobile and no more double selling of software - witch is great for customers. The same applies either direction.  I say it'll be more force thing for mobile devs to have to support PC than PC supporting mobile as they will have to release their game and make it cross buy for both platforms while PC games could simple not release for mobile thus keeping mobile from purchasing their content by mistake if they don't own a PC in the first place.

More or less you could simply add a tag that displays if they support both or not in the Icon/image/display so customers know in a glance if they can use it or not. PC/Mobile/Hybrid icons would work here pretty easy.

PC games will usually have a PC/Hybrid icon
Mobile games will usually have a PC and/or Mobile icon ("and/or" being the key wording)

kevinw729
Honored Visionary


.....

What do you guys think is going to be the affect on software developers of the Oculus Link... if any?




Thanks for the observation, well on point.
What is VR without good content - just a walking simulator! So yes the content is going to be pivotal to this and all platforms, but in particular the destination of purchasing the hardware to play the games (horses for courses).

For me, I remember the  situation I saw in a retailer, where they had to explain the difference between the Rift and GearVR - the retailer did a really bad job of it and the customer left with a brand new GearVR, only to return a few days later complaining they could not play BeatSaber or Elite on it!.

This is what will happen with Quest - people will see the Quest original, and not know the intricacies about Link and will feel disappointed. I am already seeing posts telling me that Link will work better than Rift with the majority of PC VR games - and that you don't even need that more powerful a PC unlike when you had the Rift (and or Rift-S)!!

We will be at that point where those that play the BeatSaber360 exclusive on their new Quest will wonder why they can't play Elite on the same system when they thought they could cause the read it somewhere; not understanding the cable thing. Or more to the point, when the sticker shock of PC VR content hits, along with the Quest cable needs - we will see a confused landscape.

And it is that confused landscape that makes picking a horse difficult for game developers. As we have seen but has been under reported, the AAA houses have grown cool to VR. Even Sony is easing back on their next raft of VR game content and they are platform winners. We are at that "3D Gaming" moment, where the media started to ease up reporting the number of game devs supporting the platform - and where the occasional signing petered out to a dribble.

Just look at it for the Indies - none of the platforms out there (including WinMR) offers a bankable return - and the eco-system of some systems is brutal. Add to this - there are a number of devs out there that have already shot their bolt, receiving investment money that is due return this and next month - prepare for more stories of closures.
 
https://vrawards.aixr.org/ "The Out-of-Home Immersive Entertainment Frontier: Expanding Interactive Boundaries in Leisure Facilities" https://www.amazon.co.uk/Out-Home-Immersive-Entertainment-Frontier/dp/1472426959

inovator
Consultant


RedRizla said:
Funny enough software is exactly what I was thinking about when they announced that Oculus Quest can be tethered to a PC. What happens if they create games like Lone Echo and someone who purchases an Oculus Quest doesn't have a PC? This makes me wonder if there is going to be a separate library for Oculus Quest PC -VR games?

That's exactly the kind of question I had too. And cross-buy is going to get a whole lot more confusing in the minds of users.... if not developers also.

Does a user with both Rift and Quest start thinking about which version to go for depending how much a particular game benefits from untethering? or how much they go travelling with their headset?

If dual headset owners start to buy just the Rift version of a game because it now works on both headsets.. or if Quest owners just buy the Rift version because they think it's better or because they think they may get a Rift in the future... would that affect the likelihood of a developer producing a dedicated Quest version?

I'm getting more questions the more I think about it.



Interesting points. As a quest and rift s owner
My plan is to buy a cross game on the quest for wireless play even at the sacrafice  of visuals. I replayed apex Construct on quest and it was more enjoyable and the visuals were good enough. Losing the wire is worth it I'm having a hard time buying superhot a 2nd time even though wirelessly would be epic. For me a sale=a buy for superhot. lol.