Notes from an Oculus Rift installation and other comments

[Easyscor]

I thought I'd share the body of the review I'm sending my son, who just might be ready to jump into VR.

Keep in mind, I admit the immersion in AH is currently unbeatable.
~~~~~~~~~~~

I like VR as you know, but if you're thinking of VR, I thought I'd give you a heads up.

Remember, I'm an Aces High terrain guy, which means I absolutely desire clarity in the terrain's ground texture up to a minimum distances of six mile, and preferably to ten miles. I want trees and clutter in the foreground to look as good as they do on my 72 pixels per inch, 27" monitor.

Current itineration's of the Oculus Rift, which I truly believe is the best product out there right now, fall far short of this, it's terrible. So let's talk about 2018 going forward and where VR is today.

I must admit that Oculus VR is great for the immersion. It brings presence, and you feel the experience, the feel of being in the environment. In an AH WWI biplane, its unbeatable.

Oculus Go looks good with its 2560 (1280/eye) x 1440 pixel resolution, a $200 price tag, and no wires. It comes with a single controller, which might be a problem for you in a first person shooter or the like. I think it's also limited to 3 degrees of freedom. That could be another problem in a first person shooter, i.e. no natural movement forward and back, side to side, or up and down within the HMD. You might need to use a keyboard. Watch for details on the final motion detection. I hope they do better, but the Software Developer's Kits "SDK" (dangit) are just coming out so stay tuned.

Then there's Santa Cruz, probably replacing the Rift. It comes with a new controller, different from the Touch. The main thing about the new head mounted display is its inside out tracking and no wires. It tracks your position and orientation, including tracking the two new Santa Cruz hand controllers, without the cables or sensors tied to your PC. Touch is cool but this would be better.

Apparently, Santa Cruz won't be available to developers until the end of 2018, and there's no price point or info on pixel resolution. Let's hope it isn't vaporware.

I'd be looking at Santa Cruz for a PC platform in winter 2018-2019, hopefully. I'd want 4k, 3840x2160, or really 3840x1080 which would be good enough and resolve to 1920x1080p per eye. That's the point I would really like to see before I could recommend VR to you.

Will the new Oculus HMD's play on your phone? I have no idea but I wouldn't care, and that's not what this is about.

At 3840 x 2160, or 1920x1080p for each eye, I would be willing to dump my monitor. Word, GIMP, Photoshop and Excel would work fine. Browsing and email? Sheesh.

On the downside right now, Oculus 2.0 is pushing users toward Windows 10. There are other products already out there with better resolution built around Win 10 and dx12. Given another year, those might surpass Oculus by the time Santa Cruz is ready.

So, save your money unless you're sure of your need, and wait until next fall's Black Friday sales, or beyond.

~~~~~~~~~~
Last I knew, my son plays a lot of 1st person shooters.

[Mister Fork]

I somewhat agree and disagree Easy on your assessment...

If you are focused on purely on resolution, 100.000% agree with you on the assessment that the clarity of either the Vive, Oculus, or PS4 VR solutions leave a lot to be desired. It's like looking as a computer screen from 1995. 

If you are focused on purefly immersion factor, current VR tech is a worthy the investment. AH3, for example, the lack of good resolution will impair stationary tank hunting but at the same time, completely unleash your ability to spot moving targets waaay faster than anyone on a monitor. And your ability to track enemy aircraft, get great position visual references from your cockpit surroundings, and your ability to quickly traverse your viewing environment in a smooth realistic fashion is unparalleled in any other gaming experience.

The question is, are you willing to live with poorer visual quality to gain on immersion? If not, then follow your advice. I'm in the boat of the current VR implementation is amazing and damn the torpedoes...I can't see them in the water anyway.

[1stpar3]

 I'm in the boat of the current VR implementation is amazing and damn the torpedoes...I can't see them in the water anyway.                                                                                                 My choice for STATEMENT/QUOTE OF THE YEAR!      Put a Fork in him fellers, Hes done!    Eh? What you say? Do you  know my grandson? 

[Easyscor]

You're right in that. I love using the Rift in aerial combat, when you shouldn't be looking at the ground anyway. But for my style of tanking on Thursday nights, it's the old monitor every time. With our 30 second tank radar delay, I'm the guy running around hunting you and I need that clarity to see you hiding in the trees before you can get more then one shot off.
In the MA, I suppose tanking with Rift would be preferable in that type of environment but I'm lucky if I can spend an hour or two a month there anymore.

[SpinDoc1]

These are all really great thoughts on VR. A couple other quick questions:

- Do you find that your play-time differs when using VR? In other words, do your eyes/head get more tired and tucker you out faster?
- Is the resource-drain on your computer worse with VR (the Rift specifically)? Have seen this posted intermittently in a couple places...

[Puma44]

I had frequent eye strain/ache for the first few hours using rift. That has passed.  I think that is because I’m not trying to focus and get the visual acuity the monitor provides.