Guys, what do you think people who work at oculus have beyond cv1. With all that money at their disposal I find it hard to believe they could stand using a crappy old cv1 when they probably have prototypes of hardware the public won't see for maybe 6 or 7 years.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on forums?
I think within the next two years we will see an oculus pro, with vastly improved displays (4K) and wider field of view, but much of the same technology of the current headset. The current GPU state-of-the-art is probably the single most limiting factor of the display technology in the rift, since it would probably take 4 to 5 times the power of the new 1080 GPU to reliably render dual 4K displays. The GTX 1000 series is amazing GPU tech, but I doubt we will see 4K VR until the next generation. I doubt they will go to intermediate resolution too, since the display matrix would still be pretty visible.
I doubt we'll see 4K screens in the next iteration... my guess, 2K per eye. I just hope they focus a lot of attention into getting rid of those godrays. It's by far the biggest problem right now.
I think within the next two years we will see an oculus pro, with vastly improved displays (4K) and wider field of view, but much of the same technology of the current headset. The current GPU state-of-the-art is probably the single most limiting factor of the display technology in the rift, since it would probably take 4 to 5 times the power of the new 1080 GPU to reliably render dual 4K displays. The GTX 1000 series is amazing GPU tech, but I doubt we will see 4K VR until the next generation. I doubt they will go to intermediate resolution too, since the display matrix would still be pretty visible.
I doubt we'll see 4K screens in the next iteration... my guess, 2K per eye. I just hope they focus a lot of attention into getting rid of those godrays. It's by far the biggest problem right now.
I think if they didn't make any steps towards real dedicated display, then I'd guess they have nothing, unless they build HMDs with shapes unsuitable for mass market (BIG 😉 ), then maybe. But I think they focus on mobiles and wouldn't be surprised if reality is they won't seriously get to prototyping CV2 untill end of this year or even later. If CV2 is supposed to be a major improvement in terms of FOV/res/SDE/lens artifacts/color vividness etc. I think they will stick to more or less same as CV1 in CV2, they'll just add features to even more make it more appealing to casuals. So social features (camera), maybe wireless version, maybe tiny changes to display, maybe 120Hz instead of 90 etc. but nothing major. If this blind guess would turn out to be spot on, then they can sit and do nothing until 2 years from now, to start in 2018 and release a year later. Up until this point, they could use the base specs of CV1 and use price and casual features to get good sales of CV2. As always - I hope I'm wrong, and this is just me guessing and I'm the one that lost faith in Oculus so don't hold much hope to see optimist scenarios happening at Oculus in terms of PC VR. To summarize - there's a pretty big chance I'm wrong, objectively speaking 😉
Not an Oculus hater, but not a fan anymore.
Still lots of respect for the team-Carmack, Abrash.
Oculus is driven by big corporation principles now. That brings painful effects already, more to come in the future. This is not the Oculus I once cheered for.
I feel like a year or 2 ago I read an arcticle about a special "VR" room at Oculus... one where they had an extremely powerful computer setup and were testing very advanced features that wouldn't quite make sense for a consumer version any time soon.
They also have a research & development lab - one that even Mark Zuckerberg did not have clearance into. (If you watch his tour of Oculus video that came out a few months ago, he tried to go in there and didn't have the correct permissions at the time!)
I imagine that they are diving deep into the possible ways that VR could work. Most of that must remain secret so that others don't end up taking the idea.
I personally want to see complete hand tracking in the near future. I think that the CV2 will have improved lenses without the God Ray effect, and that it will be 2K in each eye (sounds like the next model of the Vive is shooting for that already.)
What I really want - but is probably at least a decade out is haptic gloves like those in Ready Player One - where they could actually stop your fingers from closing, so that for example when you pick up an apple or a sword in the game - you can actually feel it and how solid it is in your hands.
I don't see either Oculus or HTC sitting still for even a second... to do so would be the same as deciding they no longer want to compete in the VR market.
Probably the time to CV2 will be something similar as the time between DK2 and CV1... a little less than 2 years, maybe quicker. Screen res will probably maintain the same pace of improvement.. Dk1 had 512k pixels per eye, DK2 had 1037k, CV1 has 1296k (think I got that right), CV2 should have something between 1.5m & 2m per eye.
I definitely see other improvements happening for CV2 though.. including lenses that everyone likes!
13700K, RTX 4070 Ti, Asus ROG Strix Z790-A Gaming, Corsair H150i Capellix, 64GB Corsair Vengence DDR5, Corsair 5000D Airflow, 4TB Samsung 870 , 2TB Samsung 990 Pro x 2, DK2, CV1, Rift-S, Quest, 2, 3, Pro, Windows 11 Pro 24H2 (10.0.26100)
I doubt they have the vision to make something great.
I think they already did
LOL. My idea of great is high contrast with at least 1440 tall screens. Neither of which the Rift provides. Eyeglass users compare the Rift experience to wearing dirty smudged glasses all day. They don't mention how nice it is to finally clean them and see again, or getting a new set of glasses to replace your old scratched pair. You can't clean away the fresnel problem.
Oculus settled for the light smearing thing as being acceptable, and I strongly disagree. I'll pay a lot more for crisp, clear optics, and heavier too.
i7-5820K @ 4.2Ghz, water cooled, Asus X99-Pro USB 3.1, 48 Gb DDR4 2400, Samsung 950 pro M.2 SSD, GTX 980 Ti SC, 750w psu
I doubt they have the vision to make something great.
I think they already did
Eyeglass users compare the Rift experience to wearing dirty smudged glasses all day.
Actually, I'd compare it to wearing clean glasses with a nice wide sweet spot and minimal chromatic aberration, and what I do see of those two I'm not convinced isn't due more to my glasses.
I doubt they have the vision to make something great.
I think they already did
LOL. My idea of great is high contrast with at least 1440 tall screens. Neither of which the Rift provides. Eyeglass users compare the Rift experience to wearing dirty smudged glasses all day. They don't mention how nice it is to finally clean them and see again, or getting a new set of glasses to replace your old scratched pair. You can't clean away the fresnel problem.
Oculus settled for the light smearing thing as being acceptable, and I strongly disagree. I'll pay a lot more for crisp, clear optics, and heavier too.
Sometimes I honestly wonder why some people come on to the Oculus forum..
