How would you feel if every game in Oculus Home which used Touch was restricted to 180°?

[Anonymous]

Sure, we know technically that Touch can do "room scale" with two cameras in opposite corners, but what if Oculus doesn't want you to set up your camera's that way by default, and instead set them up in front of you. Because of this, all their content on Oculus Home could be subjective to 180° tracking; and since they are on a mission to have Oculus Home content exclusive's with Touch, those titles may be limited to 180°.

How do you feel about this? Does this limit VR content to a lower common denominator, or does this put restrictions on VR in a good way - more user friendly (less tangled cords, more direct interaction, easier for the average Joe to jump in)? What are your thoughts?

[Anonymous]

Well they can't do anything to limit you, you can setup your camera in the opposite corners if you wanted. Plus front facing isn't 180°, its more like 270°.

They are just 'defaulting' to a front facing experience so you can setup both your sensors on your computer desk so it's accessible to as many people as possible. (I'm in the group of people where it would be impossible for me to set up the vive opposite corner sensors and the front facing would work best for me.)

Lets not forget that most games are more comfortable if you only need to look 'forward', look at a lot of vive games for example like space pirate trainer and audio shield which are really popular. There is no need to force 360° roomscale on everything just because you can, most of the time it isn't even needed. Games like Tiltbush are a good example of something that really make it wourth using full 360° roomscale but if you wanted that on touch you could just move the sensors after all.

[shadowfrogger]

I don't like it, But it a limitation(not because of the hardware) that devs will work around still find ways to do exciting games. I'm sure any hardcore game e.g fallout 4 will have special options for opposite facing.
So I don't think it's going to affect the games that really matter. PSVR has it a lot worse but it comes down to the dev and not the technology.

Bloody Civilization 1 had 3 megs of space, 640k ram & 256 colours yet you could experience a whole new world. First gen VR has severe limitations, So did every genre of game at one time, it didn't stop the fun at the time unless you let it. People will be complaining about every generational step of VR and complaints can be good but you also just gotta sit back (or Stand up) and make the most out of the experience. No one can change the specs or limitations by complaining now, That time is over. All that's left is to enjoy the heck out of first gen VR!

[Hanover]

tranceology3 said:

Sure, we know technically that Touch can do "room scale" with two cameras in opposite corners, but what if Oculus doesn't want you to set up your camera's that way by default, and instead set them up in front of you. Because of this, all their content on Oculus Home could be subjective to 180° tracking; and since they are on a mission to have Oculus Home content exclusive's with Touch, those titles may be limited to 180°.

How do you feel about this? Does this limit VR content to a lower common denominator, or does this put restrictions on VR in a good way - more user friendly (less tangled cords, more direct interaction, easier for the average Joe to jump in)? What are your thoughts?

You mean the setup that 90% of the VR audience will have room for?  I don't see any problems with that.

[jon]

It won't be limited like that from a store standpoint.  The limitation will come from game design itself, where developers choose to focus on a front facing 270 degrees or so around player.  The design limitation isn't going to be driven by Rift alone, it'll be driven by the combined market size of Rift, PSVR and Project Scorpio.  For developers that prioritize it, the difference between a front facing and 360 degree tracking setup might simply come down to an in-game settings toggle.

There's still too much unknown about how games will ultimately be developed - people's opinions are still too colored by the pursuit of the VR of science fiction.  It was just yesterday I read something about a way to make analog stick-based movement significantly less vomit inducing by dynamically restricting the field of view.  It might well be that the most pragmatic way to get VR into vast, sprawling games like Fallout, Grand Theft Auto or Elder Scrolls without teleportation happens to involve movement a lot like pre-VR in the same games.  In that case, a front-facing experience might actually be better, as it allows the player to be lazy and sit down on their couch while playing.  :smile:

[pjenness]

Is that like the "Oculus cant do room scale", yet once I received the CV1 I happily walked around my few metres play area room with it?

next....

[Percy1983]

I short I wouldn't care, spinning on the spot will just lead to problems so happy to use the thumbstick to turn/move.

[Mr_Creepy]

As long as they don't dictate that every game sold on their shop, can only be 180, i don't mind.

[bigmike20vt]

i still have not given up completely the dream of getting TWO cameras with the touch, and an adapter to run 2 of them from 1xusb 3.0. The fact that oculus have not said anything at E3 yet has dulled my hope a little, but, if 2 cameras can do 270 degree tracking then 3 can do 360 (in a triangle like setup)

[nalex66]

We've seen the Touch packaging--it's a fancy black box much like the Rift box, and there's only one camera in it. It may be possible to buy a third camera in the future (assuming the software can support that set-up), but it won't be the default Touch set-up.