my CV2 specs

[JakemanOculus]

These specs would be worthy of the name CV2.  It would strike the right balance of value versus upgrade cost.  The non-resolution specs are perhaps the most important items.  Increased FoV and bifocal in particular could really help immersion.  If they don't do enough to improve the overall experience (immersion, presence, comfort, etc) then it will be fundamentally the same experience which is not what you want for a major version increase.

I would caution against 1800p resolution.  But if they can enforce multi-projection in their stack and wait until mid 2019 then the GPU requirements will not be insane.  At that point they would be supporting most of the previous generation of video cards (GTX 1060+).  Although the GTX 9xx owners would be SOL.

Specs:
FoV - 120 degrees (up from 110 degrees).
Lenses - Lose the God rays.
Ergonomics - Multiple swappable facial interfaces ship with the HMD, or perhaps a modular facial interface.
Sound - Possible audio straps like the Go.
Backwards compatibility with peripherals - This would be HUGE for CV2 adoption because it would lower the upgrade cost.
Bifocal - The simplest implementation of multifocal.  A lens system with two focal distances on a manual toggle.

Optional Resolution #1:
Resolution - 1440p (2592 x 1440).
Effective increase in picture quality - 9.1% increase in picture quality considering the extra FoV.
Pixel count - 44% increase.
GPU Requirement - GTX 970+, GTX 1060+

Optional Resolution #2: (identical to the Vive Pro)
Resolution - 1600p (2880 x 1600).
Effective increase in picture quality - 21.2% increase in picture quality considering the extra FoV.
Pixel count - 77.8% increase.
GPU Requirement - GTX 980+, GTX 1060+

Optional Resolution #3:
Resolution - 1800p (3240 x 1800).
Effective increase in picture quality - 36.4% increase in picture quality considering the extra FoV.
Pixel count - 125% increase.
GPU Requirement - GTX 1070+ (or GTX 1060+ if they can enforce multi-projection)

Expected release date:
2nd quarter 2019.

Expected upgrade cost from a CV1 system: (given backwards compatibility with peripherals)
$400 for the CV2 HMD by itself (no peripherals).
$200 for a GTX 1060 in 12 months (if you don't already have one).
Total upgrade cost = $400 - $600

Mistakes of the Vive Pro:
Not enough of an upgrade - The Vive Pro is basically just an increase in resolution.  It is fundamentally the same experience so it is not a worthy upgrade.  That is why the non-resolution specs are so important.
Upgrade cost is too high - That is why it is important for Oculus to support existing CV1 peripherals as a means to reduce the upgrade cost.  If Oculus can manage a $400 HMD (no peripherals) then that will be half the upgrade cost of a Vive Pro.  And Oculus is in a better position to sell their HMD on the cheap because their revenue comes from software not hardware.

[Anonymous]

JakemanOculus said:

Although the GTX 9xx owners would be SOL.

I am well aware my GTX970 is well out of range for the next big VR release. But I am ok with that - I do plan on upgrading once this crypto business is figured out. I will not upgrade to a 1060 - which would be a minimal upgrade, if I am doing it I am getting the 1070 / next gen equivalent.

I don't know to much about the actual mechanics of how VR works - but I do think the lenses need to be updated for the reduction of god-rays, apparently these have been figured out on the Oculus Go? I mean - I barely notice them even when watching movies, but they are there and I can see how they can be annoying if you were to focus on them - as a long time glasses wearer I do not have an issue with this.

As for resolution - it will need a big enough boost that it is worth upgrading for, but I don't think they will want to cut out potential customers due to hardware limitation. My hope would be for the 3rd option or perhaps the ability to select the resolution you want displayed. Again I don't know how VR works - but essentially it is a couple of screens in front of your eyes so the resolution could be scalable?

Backwards compatibility with the sensors and controllers would be a huge plus - and part of the reason I think that Vive blew it with the release of the Vive Pro is they are not offering a package deal at a competitive price. But it would definitely depend on whether or not they are introducing new controllers and if that would require upgraded sensors. I would totally go for new sensors if there is an updated control system featuring full-scale body tracking and finger manipulation.

[AzzAmoebA]

I think John Carmack said in a speach a while ago, if he could magically perfect either hardware or software, the software would be the better choice to make full and effective use of the current hardware.

I see the biggest limiting factor to increasing the pixels on HMDs atm is the cost of hardware to drive them, yes the 970 is getting long in the tooth (I'm a current owner), but no slouch for most alot of uses, unless you need settings maxed out above 1080p.

I beleive when the next generation of GPUs is released and performance for dollar ratio improves would be the best time to consider releasing the next gen HMD

[Anonymous]

AzzAmoebA said:

I think John Carmack said in a speach a while ago, if he could magically perfect either hardware or software, the software would be the better choice to make full and effective use of the current hardware.

I see the biggest limiting factor to increasing the pixels on HMDs atm is the cost of hardware to drive them, yes the 970 is getting long in the tooth (I'm a current owner), but no slouch for most alot of uses, unless you need settings maxed out above 1080p.

I beleive when the next generation of GPUs is released and performance for dollar ratio improves would be the best time to consider releasing the next gen HMD

Definitely - I mean I run most flat games in 1080p at near 60fps for most well-optimized current gen games with my 970.

It handles the Rift reasonably well - I mean it definitely push it further than most regular games. I believe it makes use of ASW through most of the games I play - but I don't know for sure, everything I have played has run great with no noticeable frame drops other than once in Robo Recall where I turned the aliasing down I believe to fix it. I can watch blu-rays in Big Screen very smoothly all settings maxed in app.

I think I still got another year maybe year and a half before I will consider upgrading.

[BeastyBaiter]

I'm hoping they push a lot further than what the OP suggests. It would be exceedingly disappointing if the CV2 is worse than the Samsung Odyssey or Vive Pro. We have to keep in mind that the CV2 will not be released this year and will need to go 3-4 years before getting a major update. I think making a GTX 1080 TI the minimum spec is perfectly reasonable, and possibly a bit too low end given the product lifespan. It would also be consistent with the CV1's minimum specs. I think the listed minimum is a GTX 970, which was Nvidia's 2nd best consumer card at the time the CV1 was released. Given the CV2 is expected late this year or sometime next, the minimum spec should be a GTX 1170 (or 2070, whatever Nvidia calls it) with the 1080 TI as an alternative minimum.

[JakemanOculus]

Actually the CV1 supports a 780Ti.  At the time of release this was one generation old.

[BeastyBaiter]

A GTX 780 TI would be an alternative to the 970, the two are roughly equal I think. Additionally, those were definitely high minimum requirements back then but now they are pretty laughable. I hope the CV2 will to follow the same pattern.

[Robbo_Cop]

I agree that you need a minimum 30% better image to justify an upgrade.

I (personally) am not that worried by the current FOV, I understand that this is a rub point for some people, but its never been an immersion breaker for me. This might come from playing lots of sports that involved face masks. I was a catcher in baseball and played hockey with a face cage and, like with VR, I found that once you got used to your FOV in the mask you no longer noticed any restriction.

So, IMHO, ideally a CV2 would have an ~50% increase in pixel density. This would require me so spend lots of money on hardware to support the headset, however, it would also mean the headset is a significant upgrade and will continue to be relevant in a few years time.

Oculus/all VR hardware manufacturers also runs the risk of falling into the Apple position. If you are selling a limited range of premium products, you rely on repeat business very heavily. You need to make each iteration a worthy successor that consumers want to upgrade to. In the meanwhile, other manufacturers enter the market at different points and are able to offer multiple products right off the bat, incorporating the very latest tech and making the premium products specs seem embarrassing. Meanwhile, its the build quality, software quality and overall user experience that are justifying sticking with the brand. If WMR HMDs continue to be offered by more brands, then the stage is set for a similar market position to emerge. Thankfully this is not yet the case as WMR HMDs are more expensive than the rift, marketing their position on an ease of entry front.