Oculus Has Already Literally Shot Itself in its Virtual Foot

Mark from Gamersledge takes a look at how the Oculus Rift team got its marketing message so very, very wrong at its pre-E3 press conference today.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
SniperControl1317d ago

I dont get this partnership, so you still need a beefy PC in order to stream to the Rift?

The tumble weed is tumbling after that announcement.

bananaboats1317d ago

"The tumble weed is tumbling after that announcement."

Not from what I been seeing. Seems people are excited about that partnership.

Good job on MS part for locking this down. Smart move

Eonjay1317d ago

"Not from what I been seeing. Seems people are excited about that partnership. "

Oh... those are probably fanboys, PR folks or people who haven't seen the demo yet. You should check it out. Then tell me why someone should be excited about this?

Testfire1317d ago

The people that are excited really don't understand the OR, what it takes to run and what the X1 is really going to be able to do with it.

NatureOfLogic_1317d ago (Edited 1317d ago )

Please, just stop. If Xbox fans don't want to miss out on true VR experiences they'll have to purchase a PS4 or just build a powerful PC that will be able to handle Oculus Rift.

JasonKCK1317d ago

Eonjay to be fair those same type of fanboys are also trying to downplay it. Two sides to every coin.

I think VR is a cool idea. I want it to succeed but can't shake that 3Dtv feeling.

Charybdis1317d ago (Edited 1317d ago )

Nice was kinda expecting windows 10 to support oculus rift. With xbox one also being part of the windows 10 platform it kinda makes sense, hopefully they will open up their console for more direct support instead of only streaming?. Always good to have multiple choices. Also hoping for more integration of occulus and other vr and ar devices into the wndows 10 platform and by that extension also the xbox one. If a game supports vr (or ar)it would be nice to be able to pick your vr display device of choice

pinkcrocodile751316d ago

While the announcement is great for fans of VR, am I the only one who feels that VR leaves me cold?

I've tried VR before and although it's different I cannot ever envisage me buying Oculus or Morpheus. I'd rather not bother.

However AR DOES interest me and I like the idea of playing with my environment.

Am I the only one who feels like this?

Godmars2901316d ago

How is it really that smart of a move when they have their own VR tech?

In lot of ways this is no better than what they tried to do with cable while talking about making their own similar service.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1316d ago
darthv721317d ago

hmmm... you need a beefy PC if you are actually "playing" vr games on the OR. when it comes to streaming then it would likely be a regular PC to pass on the video stream to the OR.

Like how the playstation TV is a go-between for streaming PS4 games in another room. All the real processing of the game data is still being handled by the console. (xb1 for the OR and PS4 for the PSTV)

Gority1317d ago

That makes no sense........

In MS case, XB1 > PC > OR

In this case, OR is just the output device.

In Sony case, PS4 > Vita TV > TV

If you are going to buy an OR anyway and prefer playing on that, it's an extra feature, nice to have. It's not a reason to purchase an OR or an X1. Not a game changer. Plus X1 + PC + OR = expensive to not doing any VR at all.

rainslacker1317d ago (Edited 1317d ago )

For me, I fail to see how it's going to gain a lot of VR support given that it's not available directly from the Xbox. IF it requires a PC to handle everything, why not just make the game directly for PC and avoid paying MS their licensing fees.

It would seem better to cut out the middle man. As far as I know, OR can already stream anything from a PC, so this tech isn't even really exclusive to the Xbox, as many different things can be streamed to a PC, and undoubtedly AR types stuff could already be implemented without the need for an X1.

Just seems like a half-a** implementation of the technology so MS can say, "Hey, look what you can do with Xbox and Windows 10". Otherwise, I am thinking the same as Gority's last statement there. It's really just a fancy way to do a HMD. I can see other ways it can be implemented which would be more compelling, particularly in a horror game, but as it's presented, it's just fracturing the market for the feature, and likely won't be implemented in anything meaningful.

donthate1317d ago

Depends on what you mean by beefy PC?

This article primarily talks about the game streaming from Xbox One to the Oculus Rift.

If you are talking about the PC itself connected directly to the Oculus Rift (which is off topic), then the processing power needed on a PC depends on the game. If Sony can make it happen on PS4, I'm sure even a modern low-end PC will have no problem.

ThanatosDMC1317d ago

I think, he is considering the hardware spec requirements for the Occulus Rift to make it even work properly.

SniperControl1317d ago (Edited 1317d ago )

The Rift is plugged into the PC, the X1 streams the game to the PC, the PC creates a virtual room and sofa, from there it's goes to the Rift.

There, is that enough on topic for you?

sonic9891317d ago

i like your direct console to PC comparison it just shows how knowledgeable people can be .
consoles are built differently wasnt it stated before even mark cerny said it, and also said thats why consoles in the past used power pc cpus instead of x86 to compete with more powerful pcs but according to him the x86 have evolved with intel and amd current work and can be modified to suit what they believe is great for a game system without compromising anything of what could have been achieved with the power pc architecture .
and lets just throw all that aside and focus on the fact that morphous was built for PS4 in mind knowing everything needed for the system and stabilizing it to function probably i dont think oculus was built for xbox it was built pcs and very powerful ones too , its obvious that they want to cut any internal processing inside the headset to reduce cost and size and be dependent on the pc specs you have, morphuos isnt like that .

Timesplitter141317d ago (Edited 1317d ago )

I really hope Valve's VR headset wins the VR war. It's much more open and no-nonsense than oculus. And Morpheus is platform-specific so it's not really an option

moomoo3191317d ago

Morpheus most certainly is an option.

Its called buy a PS4, buy a morpheus, and have a VR experience better than whatever the hell Phil Spencer just demonstrated lol.

brads41317d ago

Based on what is it a better experience? Your intuition?

Timesplitter141317d ago (Edited 1317d ago )

I'm guessing it's based on the average N4G user's blatant insecurity that surfaces whenever the PS4 is doubted.

it's the same kind of insecurity that -mysteriously- changed N4G's general stance on remasters overnight the day the Uncharted collection was announced

rainslacker1317d ago

Ideally, for VR to really take off, a single base to code VR experiences to would be the most beneficial to consumers and developers. Once all that is settled, if it ever is, then VR could see a lot of support without the headaches involved of trying to code several different API's, and the hardware itself can stand on it's own features instead of the support one company can muster for the tech.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1317d ago
SniperControl1317d ago (Edited 1317d ago )

Hang on guys, from what i can see, the Rift is plugged into the PC and not the X1, so your streaming from the X1 to PC, then through onto the Rift. There is still need for the PC to do some work creating the virtual room and virtual screen, plus is there any sort of headtracking going on?

Rift's minimum spec equates to a Gtx670, which is still a pretty decent gpu.

DivoJones1317d ago

It's even more simple than that.. you need a beefy PC to run the oculus, period. It's a dual-screen monitor that renders 3d, so two different images that need to be in perfect sync. The recommended PC specs were a quad core i7, and a very high end graphics card, 8gb ram, etc, 2x USB 3.0 ports. Maybe later versions will utilize USB C, for it's higher bandwidth and a simpler interface.. if it can handle dual 4k screens it should be able to handle what the Oculus requires.

The screen room for 2d games isn't all that bad, but I can certainly understand why people are disappointed/amused. That said, you certainly can't expect it to magically make every game a 3d immersive experience.. games need to be developed specifically for that purpose.

SmielmaN1317d ago

Too... Much.... Logic.... Must.... Bubble... Up.... Well said.

Azzanation1317d ago

More options are always a good thing. This isn't MS's focus, this is only to counter its competitors with VR devices. MS's true focus is AR (Hololens)

O-R is an accessories usable on multiple devices, nothing bad can come from this. I am more interested in AR technology, I am past the VR stage. It doesn't impress me and never did.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1316d ago
bunt-custardly1317d ago

I disagree with the author but I can understand why he thinks this way.

Let me enlighten you.

There's something rather special being able to watch movies or play games on a massive cinema screen (in 2D) using a VR headset. It's not all about making from the ground up VR experiences as there will be plenty of those.

As an extra app this is a nice addition and not a replacement.

Thatguy-3101317d ago

So your'e telling me that you would prefer playing on a virtual screen rather than on a real one?? What 0.o???? heck the resolution was atrocious why would you even bother with it when the experience will be better out here in the real world.

SteamPowered1317d ago

Actually the resolution is amazing because the pixels and viewing surface are so small. It can simulate a curved screen in any aspect and in roughly 2-3K.
That experience in the real world would cost you $100,000.

bunt-custardly1317d ago

How many people have cinema screens in their homes?

I have tried the Gear VR Oculus Cinema app and it's brilliant regardless of the lower quality. You can get the movie experience in the comfort of your own home.

This looks like allowing people to stream to a giant TV screen which is great if you don't own one in real life.

FPSFox1317d ago (Edited 1317d ago )

@ SteamPowered

You have no clue what you are talking about so best you stop pulling "2k, 3k" numbers out your ass. More than 50% of the screen in this concept demo was wasted on the virtual world simulation. I don't care how densely packed the pixels are on the Oled inside the rift... Pixels are pixels. Your fake virtual screen of only a real resolution of 960 x 540 or so is not better than my ACTUAL 1920x1080.

I'm experiencing every pixel, and you are being cheated out of your resolution because your not satisfied with the size of your TV... not worth it

ThanatosDMC1317d ago

Confusing comment. I literally have no idea what point you're trying to make.

Debaitable1317d ago

"Yeah, it's not as nice as having an actual vr experience in the game, and maybe it's a novelty, but I get the feeling they're trying to create an environment in which to play games and not just a device to play them on. It's like the Steam streaming solution to Linux support. They want to support as many titles as possible, but some titles won't be supported natively so they need to do these tricks.

In the end, I see a situation where someone can avoid paying hundreds or thousands on monitors AND a vr headset. They can buy just the Rift or the Vive and see virtual monitors on their desk in their virtual private jet. Just click a shortcut and the scene melts away to "boot up" the cockpit in Elite: Dangerous.

It seems dumb, but done right, they're opening up the possibility to use the Rift as a cheaper display solution than traditional monitors. By making screens virtual, you can change your display resolution on a whim to anything you want. Curved displays, dual or triple monitors, you name it."

WeAreLegion1317d ago

The people disagreeing with you have no idea what it's like to watch something on a VR device. So, don't bother replying to them.

This feature is nice.

balth991317d ago

Hey man, author here.

I respect and understand this viewpoint -- but that's NOT what was presented today - they are not attempting to create a 'massive' cinema screen. If you go back and look at the video, she seems to be ten feet away from it. It's just boggling to me that you wouldn't want some kind of controllable situation to move closer or farther from the virtual screen -- they didn't even intimate any of that in this demo.

bunt-custardly1317d ago (Edited 1317d ago )

You're making an assumption that this is the only room available. Sure it's what they showed today but might not be the only choice when it's fully realized next year. The Oculus Cinema app for Gear VR as an example has, Movie theatre, Moon surface, Home Cinema and Void. For all you know they could introduce specific themed rooms to suit the game you are playing.

Gear VR already has this such as Dreamworks Theatre and Insurgency Demo.

Either way, what was shown is still a representation of a large home cinema screen and actually looks the same as the home cinema for Gear VR which having actually played it fills an entire wall not some small 50" TV.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1317d ago
Rimeskeem1317d ago

I just need more proof that this isn't a gimmick. What I saw today didn't exactly prove it wasn't.

Destiny10801317d ago

you plug it into a powerful pc and then stream 900p content to it

uth111317d ago

but scaled to a virtual screen at who-knows what actual resolution, so it won't look as good as a real screen.

Crazay1317d ago (Edited 1317d ago )

Soo...wait... Will this change anything with respect to Hololens?

NM - I finally got to watch the video with Hyrb.

I'm still not all that jazzed about VR. AR seems more interesting to me.