At its best, VR is really expensive (headset/controller equipment + hardware to run it well) and mostly limited to rail-based shooter games, racing games, and flight sims... and anything less than that is basically not worth doing.
I've always love the idea of VR, but it's still too niche for me to invest in right now.
That's not even close to the types of games and experiences that dominate the available content.
VR's still finding its feet in terms of what genres port well and what new genres could be created, but the ones you've listed are perhaps the least suited to VR because they're mostly very nausea-inducing.
I agree that it's worth going the whole hog though. I had the Gear VR for years and now have the Vive, which is so far above the Gear it's a different species.
It's the on-rails bit that kills it for me. Why can't they just have a thumstick on one of the hand held controllers to handle X Y movement? It's otherwise quite fun.
Yeah ,you need the movement sensors in the HMD or you shouldn't have any. Unless you have flawless hand to eye coordination that is, then a joystick can replace that. But, that person does not exist, I think. :D
From my experience playing Minecraft on the Rift DK1, it's not really the character movement that causes motion sickness. For me, it was the jittering when I turned my head. I eventually adapted to keeping my head still and using only the mouse to "turn" my head. The abstraction worked for me, because I'm used to playing video games, but I suppose one of the main draws of VR is in having that kind of control.
So movement is possible, but you do need high frame-rates if you want to let players look around with their head without causing nausea.
I suspect these headsets aren't designed for the US market, but rather the Chinese market, where the vast majority of customers couldn't possibly afford a Rift or Vive and the $2000 PC to power it.
To be fair, I don’t know many people (I’m living western Europe) who can afford a Rift or Vive and the $2000 PC to power it, either. Or, those I do know, aren’t interested in the least—even though they would all classify as geeks. Sure, they’ll try it out at a show/convention, exclaiming "Neat!", but once the headset is off, "Not $3k neat, though…".
If these "geeks" don't already own at least a good portion of the $2000 computer required for VR then they really aren't geeks are they? Most people interested in VR already have powerful gaming rigs. Yes, you might need a video card upgrade but that's about it. It's a bit disingenuous to say that VR costs $3k to get into.
I personally decided to take the plunge on a Vive+GTX 1080 and my cost all in was just less than $1600. Granted my base system is an older i5-2500K but it seems to work well enough with the incredibly potent Pascal added to the mix.
I found my GTX 970 to be respectable but clearly lacking in terms of VR capabilities, but others might not have the same needs as I do.
Also, not usually about having gaming computers, anecdotally speaking. (I personally spent $700 in 2010 to get a 6" netbook that fit in my pocket. That seems like the more usual kind of thing.)
A PC that can power a Rift does not cost 2,000. A Radeon RX 480 is fully capable of the high frame rates VR requires, and a PC with that GPU is far less than a thousand <insert €,$ or £ here>. That's the price of a flagship phone, for a very capable PC.
The Chinese market already has plenty of clones available. For example, the Deepoon E2, which is a DK2 clone lacking position tracking (along with hacked 'compatibility' with the Oculus SDK 0.8 version). There was a lot of furore a few months back over Oculus adding a device check to their software, with the accusation flying that it was intended to lock out a Vive emulation layer, with little mention of the clones already on sale that declare compatibility with games using the Rift SDK without actually meeting the same quality standards (e.g. lack of position tracking, lack of low persistence, etc).
There are actually a lot more Chinese cheap vr clones, but none of them have hacked the Oculus SDK 1.0...as of yet. Some actually choose to be compatible with SteamVR, and also requires some messy hacking..
Oh certainly, that was just the one that immediately came to mind. Oculus' 'entitlement check' was easily bypassed, but it seems it is sufficient to do its job, making 'access' to content on Oculus Home not worth the sustained cat & mouse effort to work around for the cash-in clones, for the moment at least.
Well, despite the interaction with software, VR is fundamentally a display technology. The Oculus and HTC understand this as they use an external computer. The GearVR and cardboard understand this as they use your existing smartphone. "All-in-one" units are ALWAYS going to be on the wrong side of the economics equation and can only only really sell themselves on convenience. So looking at cheap AIOs gives the result you'd expect.
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple released a $2000-3000 all in one VR headset since they love integration, but I think the vast majority will be cheaper modular displays (possibly with extra sensors or gyros) where you slot in an upgradeable SOC of your choice
Wow, that was a lot of data to remember hah, good job there. Yeah, I've tried some of the "cheap Chinese" VR sets that have been cropping up around China as "entertainment booths". Some are pretty rough and nauseous and most are not comparable to the Vive. I wonder if there were any cheap tethered VR's and what were they like... I could see that expanding the VR population
I'm not personally concerned with the S820 or HTC 10, but I would like to see the in-depth stuff for the AMD GPUs. I hate to complain/derail/etc in the comments box, but AT does a really good job with digging into graphics cards so I'm keenly interested in seeing your take on the 460 in particular.
Tom's Hardware has always been better for GPU reviews. They do them timely and have neat tables where you can compare different brands according to specific game and/or resolutions so you know exactly which will suit you best.
Since AT was bought by the same company that owns Toms, they're basically two people sharing the same umbrella. Don't get me wrong I love both sites, but I have noticed they've become much more similar since that transition.
I completely disagree on that. PC component reviews are a lot more relevant on Tom's. On here most reviews are basically marketing for equivalent Apple products, which means you get very little reviews or comparisons of components on here.
Yet another chicken/egg situation. There won't be any killer VR titles until VR is in the hands of millions, but until there are killer titles available the masses won't be buying VR headsets. For whatever reason $200 seems to be a psychological barrier. Once people can get one of these for under $200 as a self-contained unit I don't think we will see widespread adoption. Tethering yourself to a PC will never take off, nor will backpack units. Once we hit 7 nm maybe there will be sufficient economies of scale to make this work but I believe we are at least 5 years out, and in those 5 years I fear VR will follow 3D into the technology graveyard.
Is there any chance of getting a look at the OSVR HDK2? Not all of us are intimidated by the configuration hurdles, I just want to know how the quality of the actual experience.
I think the easiest way would be a Playstation 4 + Playstation VR, for something that's apparently real VR, even if it's not as good as the PC based things.
Considering the three real VR headsets seem like they're just kind of "good enough" paired with a PS4 or a high end PC, these things running low to mid range phone CPUs are both hilarious, and kind of offensive.
Great article providing some handy perspective on this topic which making waves in the tech world. If you absolutely want to experience this today, then you should be ready to buy one if the high end headsets. Otherwise good but cheap headsets are still a couple years away at least.
"Current estimates put 500k headsets in the market (of varying degrees of power) with another 2.7 million by the end of 2017"
That's lolworthy economics of scale when AMD in it's darkest days can sell at least 10M discrete GPUs a year. Apple can probably sell that many iPhones within the first hour on iPhone launch day.
You could get a decent PC capable of VR for under a $1000. Say, a Zen + RX480 + 8Gigs RAM + SSD. Throw in an Oculus Rift for $600 and you're looking at around $1500. Where do you guys came up with the $3000 figure ? I suspect is the Nvidia camp who still insist that VR should start with a GTX 1080. C'mon.
From testing I have seen online a 480 isn't close to enough firepower for VR at present the 1080 appears to be adequate and the Titan X is really the best option - and if VR takes off (it won't) even that hardware will likely be weak within a relatively short time frame. But I would agree $3k is being a bit generous, closer to 2k in reality with a 1080.
I haven't seen the same stuff as you then. All I read was in support of RX 480 being good enough for VR at this point in time. I don't argue that "more is better", but the benchmarks (Steam VR, people playing VR games @ 90fps) I have seen of the RX 480 and the minimum requirements of Oculus and HTC Vive point to the RX 480 being a good card for a VR ready PC. Any links would be appreciated. It's still tough to get dedicated VR tests from reliable websites. :)
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/08/11/amd_nvid... From what i have read on hardocp VR reviews, the 480 has reprojection issues. Not sure if its DX11 related or not. But AMD needs to get it fixed cause right now the nvidia 1080 seems to be the only true "premium VR experience" . Not sure where all this liquid VR support is, but we are not seeing it.
The problem is UE4. It runs like crap on AMD hardware and it's not clear whether Epic is going to try to fix it, or if they're just going to laugh all the way to the bank where they cash nVidia's check.
Half the games in VR are UE4. And, yes this hinders the experience on AMD immensely.
However there are still many games that do run alright on AMD. More horsepower is definitely better in VR, and that plus gimped UE4 means the best experience is sadly an Nvidia 970 and up. 290/390/480/X are still viable for many games but the experience suffers thanks largely to UE4.
Cheap VR means no VR, at least for me. I've had enough of getting dizzy and vomiting after less than a minute of cheap Chinese VR "rides" that combine horrible low resolution displays and nausea-inducing movies with fast motion. All it takes is a few seconds of the eyes, inner ear and brain not syncing before lunch/dinner comes back up.
I've also tried the Rift and Vive headsets. They're much more comfortable to wear and play on but the system cost and low overall resolution mean they're for hardcore gamers only for now.
Using my hacked VRidge/Riftcat VR headset with 3D glasses (currently Fiit VR 2N) and my Nexus 6 works fairly well for 10 minutes (haven't bought the full version of the software yet and it only allows 10 minutes sessions in the free version). I can make myself sick by doing weird stuff in an Android roller coaster app though.
Personally, I would need least 1080p 75Hz 5 - 5.5" with a gyroscope and a comfortable fit at under 200USD to consider this. The stuff I saw was either lacking too many features (resolution, tracking, refresh rate) or was too expensive (DK2 clone Deepoon E2 costs basically a little less than a used DK2 here, which is too much for me to consider a knock off).
2.7 million by the end of 2017? At that rate it is going to be 5 years before we see a true killer app for VR. It is going to take a Nintendo-level innovation to actually speed this up.
Given how absolutely tiny the VR market is, I will go as far as to say any VR solution without a first party killer app will be an automatic market failure (like the writeup mentioned, good luck with the chicken and egg problem as a pure HW or SW VR vendor). That only leaves the current gen consoles and Apple with any chance of mainstream success at VR.
So here’s the thing: the Skyworth headset is essentially a smartphone under the hood that you can’t take out. So what makes it better than a Samsung VR headset where the smartphone can be attached / detatched? One would assume it’s a price thing
I have GearVR, and I can see advantages of why this can be better than Samsung GearVR - and it is not the price. Basically, this would be "always ready" for use, unlike GearVR where you need to unlock, dock, then undock and unlock again (common GearVR bug that asks to 'unlock' already unlocked phone), then optionally clean phone display etc...
Often I had idea to use GearVR for some short gaming or 3D movie, and decided against due to this 'preparation' time. It is same reason as why I never used my PC for movie watching on TV, even if streaming works - too much time in preparations (set secondary display, change TV source...). It is amazing how important it is for things to "just work" with push of a button, without any complex preparation needed, if people are to use that thing frequently.
As some who develops both hardware and software for VR and Mixed Reality, I appreciate great articles like this to confirm my own findings. Frankly buy a one of the Chinese Snapdragon 820/821 phones from LeTV, OnePlus3. Xiaomi, ZTE, or ZUK or the new Nexus/Pixel that will be Google Daydream compatible with an HMD shell and call it a day. Trying to push more than 60 fps on a mobile platform is hard if you want more than simple shaders and geometry and frankly anymore than that strapped to your head makes no sense. I would rather see more HMD designs like the Pico NEO which tethers the processor/battery/control and keeps the headset light.
I can't say a lot right now, but a dual component design that I feel will afford you the ability to use a more powerful SOC (one we haven't seen in a phone), improved (light and comfortable) HMD design, display panel and optics, IMU, positional tracking and a power source without making the thing look the monstrosities from from Intel & AMD is really the only the course one can go at this time if you want to compete with the HTC Vive or even the Sony Playstation VR.
Sadly, getting it to a price point that doesn't make someone have second thoughts that they should have went with a dedicated system is the real challenge and frankly we are not there yet.
I have the G7 edge with gearVR. I absolutely love it! Oculus store is great, and the content grows all the time. One of the best apps is the Netflix app. End space (not a rail shooter) is a really fun game, coupled with a Bluetooth controller you really get a great space flight experience. Affected the manor, well my daughter watches scary movies all the time without flinching, and she only lasted 2 minutes with affected, she threw the whole headset off. Sure the graphics are not Vive, or rift, but the whole system works like a console. easy menus and setup. Thats why i feel sony will have the best VR for the money. Content, cost and ease of use will be the winner. If successful, that will push more development to PC and other platforms and in a few years, the current high end VR platforms will seem archaic.
I just got a VR Box unit as seen in the first image. It's like a fancier Google Cardboard device, with two lenses and a smartphone holder. Surprisingly it's not bad, I use it with a Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 and the resolution is decent. My favorite app so far is a solar system flythrough - the planets look huge hanging in 3D space, although the phone gets burning hot after 10 minutes of play. Movies don't look good on this because the pixels are visible.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
59 Comments
Back to Article
nathanddrews - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
So if I had to summarize this article:At its best, VR is really expensive (headset/controller equipment + hardware to run it well) and mostly limited to rail-based shooter games, racing games, and flight sims... and anything less than that is basically not worth doing.
I've always love the idea of VR, but it's still too niche for me to invest in right now.
BugblatterIII - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
That's not even close to the types of games and experiences that dominate the available content.VR's still finding its feet in terms of what genres port well and what new genres could be created, but the ones you've listed are perhaps the least suited to VR because they're mostly very nausea-inducing.
I agree that it's worth going the whole hog though. I had the Gear VR for years and now have the Vive, which is so far above the Gear it's a different species.
Mr Perfect - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
It's the on-rails bit that kills it for me. Why can't they just have a thumstick on one of the hand held controllers to handle X Y movement? It's otherwise quite fun.prisonerX - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Because people don't want to throw up.theduckofdeath - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
Yeah ,you need the movement sensors in the HMD or you shouldn't have any. Unless you have flawless hand to eye coordination that is, then a joystick can replace that. But, that person does not exist, I think. :Dmkozakewich - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
From my experience playing Minecraft on the Rift DK1, it's not really the character movement that causes motion sickness. For me, it was the jittering when I turned my head. I eventually adapted to keeping my head still and using only the mouse to "turn" my head. The abstraction worked for me, because I'm used to playing video games, but I suppose one of the main draws of VR is in having that kind of control.So movement is possible, but you do need high frame-rates if you want to let players look around with their head without causing nausea.
sonicmerlin - Thursday, September 15, 2016 - link
You really think your experience applies when you've only tried the very first prototype?Flunk - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
I suspect these headsets aren't designed for the US market, but rather the Chinese market, where the vast majority of customers couldn't possibly afford a Rift or Vive and the $2000 PC to power it.xype - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
To be fair, I don’t know many people (I’m living western Europe) who can afford a Rift or Vive and the $2000 PC to power it, either. Or, those I do know, aren’t interested in the least—even though they would all classify as geeks. Sure, they’ll try it out at a show/convention, exclaiming "Neat!", but once the headset is off, "Not $3k neat, though…".sphigel - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
If these "geeks" don't already own at least a good portion of the $2000 computer required for VR then they really aren't geeks are they? Most people interested in VR already have powerful gaming rigs. Yes, you might need a video card upgrade but that's about it. It's a bit disingenuous to say that VR costs $3k to get into.msweeney - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
This is an important observation, thank you.I personally decided to take the plunge on a Vive+GTX 1080 and my cost all in was just less than $1600. Granted my base system is an older i5-2500K but it seems to work well enough with the incredibly potent Pascal added to the mix.
I found my GTX 970 to be respectable but clearly lacking in terms of VR capabilities, but others might not have the same needs as I do.
msweeney - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Oh I forgot to add this for those who do happen to be on the fence:I have never been a religious person, but I will say that Elite Dangerous on a VIVE/1080 is positively *divine*.
Mugur - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
What's the status for the Vive issues in ED? I've contemplating myself buying a headset for Elite next year...Badelhas - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
I have a 1070 and the Vive. Installed that game but haven't tried it yet. Is it that good?!Cheers
xthetenth - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Being a geek is a lifestyle thing, not an income bracket.mkozakewich - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
Also, not usually about having gaming computers, anecdotally speaking.(I personally spent $700 in 2010 to get a 6" netbook that fit in my pocket. That seems like the more usual kind of thing.)
theduckofdeath - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
A PC that can power a Rift does not cost 2,000. A Radeon RX 480 is fully capable of the high frame rates VR requires, and a PC with that GPU is far less than a thousand <insert €,$ or £ here>.That's the price of a flagship phone, for a very capable PC.
edzieba - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
The Chinese market already has plenty of clones available. For example, the Deepoon E2, which is a DK2 clone lacking position tracking (along with hacked 'compatibility' with the Oculus SDK 0.8 version). There was a lot of furore a few months back over Oculus adding a device check to their software, with the accusation flying that it was intended to lock out a Vive emulation layer, with little mention of the clones already on sale that declare compatibility with games using the Rift SDK without actually meeting the same quality standards (e.g. lack of position tracking, lack of low persistence, etc).hyno111 - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
There are actually a lot more Chinese cheap vr clones, but none of them have hacked the Oculus SDK 1.0...as of yet. Some actually choose to be compatible with SteamVR, and also requires some messy hacking..edzieba - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
Oh certainly, that was just the one that immediately came to mind. Oculus' 'entitlement check' was easily bypassed, but it seems it is sufficient to do its job, making 'access' to content on Oculus Home not worth the sustained cat & mouse effort to work around for the cash-in clones, for the moment at least.Morawka - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
these are cheap VR porn viewing devices... nothing morepiiman - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
What more could you want? :)stephenbrooks - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Well, despite the interaction with software, VR is fundamentally a display technology. The Oculus and HTC understand this as they use an external computer. The GearVR and cardboard understand this as they use your existing smartphone. "All-in-one" units are ALWAYS going to be on the wrong side of the economics equation and can only only really sell themselves on convenience. So looking at cheap AIOs gives the result you'd expect.jaggedcow - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple released a $2000-3000 all in one VR headset since they love integration, but I think the vast majority will be cheaper modular displays (possibly with extra sensors or gyros) where you slot in an upgradeable SOC of your choiceSushisamurai - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Wow, that was a lot of data to remember hah, good job there. Yeah, I've tried some of the "cheap Chinese" VR sets that have been cropping up around China as "entertainment booths". Some are pretty rough and nauseous and most are not comparable to the Vive. I wonder if there were any cheap tethered VR's and what were they like... I could see that expanding the VR populationRaichuPls - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
So when are you going to examine the S820 and the HTC 10 and the RX480/470/460?fanta666 - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Only when htc sends them the chequeBrokenCrayons - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
I'm not personally concerned with the S820 or HTC 10, but I would like to see the in-depth stuff for the AMD GPUs. I hate to complain/derail/etc in the comments box, but AT does a really good job with digging into graphics cards so I'm keenly interested in seeing your take on the 460 in particular.theduckofdeath - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
Tom's Hardware has always been better for GPU reviews. They do them timely and have neat tables where you can compare different brands according to specific game and/or resolutions so you know exactly which will suit you best.artk2219 - Wednesday, September 14, 2016 - link
Since AT was bought by the same company that owns Toms, they're basically two people sharing the same umbrella. Don't get me wrong I love both sites, but I have noticed they've become much more similar since that transition.theduckofdeath - Wednesday, September 14, 2016 - link
I completely disagree on that. PC component reviews are a lot more relevant on Tom's. On here most reviews are basically marketing for equivalent Apple products, which means you get very little reviews or comparisons of components on here.sonicmerlin - Thursday, September 15, 2016 - link
Oh god just shut itfanofanand - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Yet another chicken/egg situation. There won't be any killer VR titles until VR is in the hands of millions, but until there are killer titles available the masses won't be buying VR headsets. For whatever reason $200 seems to be a psychological barrier. Once people can get one of these for under $200 as a self-contained unit I don't think we will see widespread adoption. Tethering yourself to a PC will never take off, nor will backpack units. Once we hit 7 nm maybe there will be sufficient economies of scale to make this work but I believe we are at least 5 years out, and in those 5 years I fear VR will follow 3D into the technology graveyard.theduckofdeath - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
At E3 games like Resident Evil VII, Star Wars Battlefront and Fallout 4 were announced for VR. That is pretty top en AAA if you'd ask me.theduckofdeath - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
*top endReflex - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Is there any chance of getting a look at the OSVR HDK2? Not all of us are intimidated by the configuration hurdles, I just want to know how the quality of the actual experience.Wolfpup - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
I think the easiest way would be a Playstation 4 + Playstation VR, for something that's apparently real VR, even if it's not as good as the PC based things.Considering the three real VR headsets seem like they're just kind of "good enough" paired with a PS4 or a high end PC, these things running low to mid range phone CPUs are both hilarious, and kind of offensive.
Danvelopment - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Did you notice any booths selling tethered VR on the cheaps?PolarisTLX - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
Great article providing some handy perspective on this topic which making waves in the tech world. If you absolutely want to experience this today, then you should be ready to buy one if the high end headsets. Otherwise good but cheap headsets are still a couple years away at least.StrangerGuy - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
"Current estimates put 500k headsets in the market (of varying degrees of power) with another 2.7 million by the end of 2017"That's lolworthy economics of scale when AMD in it's darkest days can sell at least 10M discrete GPUs a year. Apple can probably sell that many iPhones within the first hour on iPhone launch day.
cocochanel - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
You could get a decent PC capable of VR for under a $1000. Say, a Zen + RX480 + 8Gigs RAM + SSD. Throw in an Oculus Rift for $600 and you're looking at around $1500. Where do you guys came up with the $3000 figure ? I suspect is the Nvidia camp who still insist that VR should start with a GTX 1080. C'mon.Death666Angel - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
Zen isn't out yet. Otherwise, yes, 3k is ridiculously overpriced for getting a VR ready setup.Icehawk - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
From testing I have seen online a 480 isn't close to enough firepower for VR at present the 1080 appears to be adequate and the Titan X is really the best option - and if VR takes off (it won't) even that hardware will likely be weak within a relatively short time frame. But I would agree $3k is being a bit generous, closer to 2k in reality with a 1080.Death666Angel - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
I haven't seen the same stuff as you then. All I read was in support of RX 480 being good enough for VR at this point in time. I don't argue that "more is better", but the benchmarks (Steam VR, people playing VR games @ 90fps) I have seen of the RX 480 and the minimum requirements of Oculus and HTC Vive point to the RX 480 being a good card for a VR ready PC. Any links would be appreciated. It's still tough to get dedicated VR tests from reliable websites. :)cptnjarhead - Thursday, September 15, 2016 - link
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/08/11/amd_nvid...From what i have read on hardocp VR reviews, the 480 has reprojection issues. Not sure if its DX11 related or not. But AMD needs to get it fixed cause right now the nvidia 1080 seems to be the only true "premium VR experience" . Not sure where all this liquid VR support is, but we are not seeing it.
Nagorak - Saturday, September 17, 2016 - link
The problem is UE4. It runs like crap on AMD hardware and it's not clear whether Epic is going to try to fix it, or if they're just going to laugh all the way to the bank where they cash nVidia's check.Half the games in VR are UE4. And, yes this hinders the experience on AMD immensely.
Nagorak - Saturday, September 17, 2016 - link
However there are still many games that do run alright on AMD. More horsepower is definitely better in VR, and that plus gimped UE4 means the best experience is sadly an Nvidia 970 and up. 290/390/480/X are still viable for many games but the experience suffers thanks largely to UE4.serendip - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
Cheap VR means no VR, at least for me. I've had enough of getting dizzy and vomiting after less than a minute of cheap Chinese VR "rides" that combine horrible low resolution displays and nausea-inducing movies with fast motion. All it takes is a few seconds of the eyes, inner ear and brain not syncing before lunch/dinner comes back up.I've also tried the Rift and Vive headsets. They're much more comfortable to wear and play on but the system cost and low overall resolution mean they're for hardcore gamers only for now.
Death666Angel - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
Using my hacked VRidge/Riftcat VR headset with 3D glasses (currently Fiit VR 2N) and my Nexus 6 works fairly well for 10 minutes (haven't bought the full version of the software yet and it only allows 10 minutes sessions in the free version). I can make myself sick by doing weird stuff in an Android roller coaster app though.Personally, I would need least 1080p 75Hz 5 - 5.5" with a gyroscope and a comfortable fit at under 200USD to consider this. The stuff I saw was either lacking too many features (resolution, tracking, refresh rate) or was too expensive (DK2 clone Deepoon E2 costs basically a little less than a used DK2 here, which is too much for me to consider a knock off).
DominionSeraph - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
"For the show this year"For what show?
You shouldn't write as though we've been following you around.
Mugur - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
IFA 2016? It's in the title...rahulsolanki1818 - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
virtual reality is an awesome technology , it has improved the way of watching videos.Shadowmaster625 - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
2.7 million by the end of 2017? At that rate it is going to be 5 years before we see a true killer app for VR. It is going to take a Nintendo-level innovation to actually speed this up.StrangerGuy - Tuesday, September 13, 2016 - link
Given how absolutely tiny the VR market is, I will go as far as to say any VR solution without a first party killer app will be an automatic market failure (like the writeup mentioned, good luck with the chicken and egg problem as a pure HW or SW VR vendor). That only leaves the current gen consoles and Apple with any chance of mainstream success at VR.Nenad - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
I have GearVR, and I can see advantages of why this can be better than Samsung GearVR - and it is not the price. Basically, this would be "always ready" for use, unlike GearVR where you need to unlock, dock, then undock and unlock again (common GearVR bug that asks to 'unlock' already unlocked phone), then optionally clean phone display etc...
Often I had idea to use GearVR for some short gaming or 3D movie, and decided against due to this 'preparation' time. It is same reason as why I never used my PC for movie watching on TV, even if streaming works - too much time in preparations (set secondary display, change TV source...). It is amazing how important it is for things to "just work" with push of a button, without any complex preparation needed, if people are to use that thing frequently.
mebalzer - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
As some who develops both hardware and software for VR and Mixed Reality, I appreciate great articles like this to confirm my own findings. Frankly buy a one of the Chinese Snapdragon 820/821 phones from LeTV, OnePlus3. Xiaomi, ZTE, or ZUK or the new Nexus/Pixel that will be Google Daydream compatible with an HMD shell and call it a day. Trying to push more than 60 fps on a mobile platform is hard if you want more than simple shaders and geometry and frankly anymore than that strapped to your head makes no sense. I would rather see more HMD designs like the Pico NEO which tethers the processor/battery/control and keeps the headset light.I can't say a lot right now, but a dual component design that I feel will afford you the ability to use a more powerful SOC (one we haven't seen in a phone), improved (light and comfortable) HMD design, display panel and optics, IMU, positional tracking and a power source without making the thing look the monstrosities from from Intel & AMD is really the only the course one can go at this time if you want to compete with the HTC Vive or even the Sony Playstation VR.
Sadly, getting it to a price point that doesn't make someone have second thoughts that they should have went with a dedicated system is the real challenge and frankly we are not there yet.
By the way, a little sneak peek at my NEODiVR uPLAy http://neodivr.com/images/NEODiVR-uPLAy-280.gif
cptnjarhead - Thursday, September 15, 2016 - link
I have the G7 edge with gearVR. I absolutely love it! Oculus store is great, and the content grows all the time. One of the best apps is the Netflix app. End space (not a rail shooter) is a really fun game, coupled with a Bluetooth controller you really get a great space flight experience. Affected the manor, well my daughter watches scary movies all the time without flinching, and she only lasted 2 minutes with affected, she threw the whole headset off. Sure the graphics are not Vive, or rift, but the whole system works like a console. easy menus and setup. Thats why i feel sony will have the best VR for the money. Content, cost and ease of use will be the winner. If successful, that will push more development to PC and other platforms and in a few years, the current high end VR platforms will seem archaic.serendip - Thursday, September 22, 2016 - link
I just got a VR Box unit as seen in the first image. It's like a fancier Google Cardboard device, with two lenses and a smartphone holder. Surprisingly it's not bad, I use it with a Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 and the resolution is decent. My favorite app so far is a solar system flythrough - the planets look huge hanging in 3D space, although the phone gets burning hot after 10 minutes of play. Movies don't look good on this because the pixels are visible.kompanions - Friday, May 1, 2020 - link
Virtual Reality is one of the trending buzzwords of the last couple of years, and yet many people say it still has a way to go until it "catches".