Oculus Rift

Loafing Oaf

GekkePrutser wrote: »

It's really what I always expected VR to be, and now it's finally here!

Most of this thread's posters on reading the above:

Zillah

ScumLord wrote: »

The fact the rift works well with one camera in this initial version, probably means that once they bring out the touch controllers and maybe add another camera for room tracking it may well be slightly better at tracking.

You might have misread me: Tested said that the Rift's tracking was a little more reliable in their experience.

MarkAnthony

I'm on the late may to 2nd June. Feckers. Still after my exams so maybe it's a blessing.

Calibos

Zillah wrote: »

You might have misread me: Tested said that the Rift's tracking was a little more reliable in their experience.

I think he agrees and is actually making the point that given that its already looking like its more reliable and easier to setup with just the one camera, that we definately have little to worry about when it comes to roomscale compared to Vive.

drunkmonkey

Calibos wrote: »

I think he agrees and is actually making the point that given that its already looking like its more reliable and easier to setup with just the one camera, that we definately have little to worry about when it comes to roomscale compared to Vive.

The CV1 won't be doing roomscale, Luckey said it's not who there pitching the rift at, it also needs a second camera connected to the PC which probably involves a 25ft cable to wrap around the room.
I think buying the rift in the belief it will have roomscale and a better touch experience than the Vive is a mistake. Luckey's great at making statements, not great at living up to them though. I'd say you've a lot to worry about.

Dyr

Calibos wrote: »

I think he agrees and is actually making the point that given that its already looking like its more reliable and easier to setup with just the one camera, that we definately have little to worry about when it comes to roomscale compared to Vive.

Romscale with the Vive is amazingly accurate and reliable in my experience.

drunkmonkey

Bambi wrote: »

Romscale with the Vive is amazingly accurate and reliable in my experience.

What do you think of the controllers as they are and what the rift ones may possibly be like in comparison?

GekkePrutser

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Most of this thread's posters on reading the above:

Well, at least you're waiting for something good Wouldn't it be worse if I said it was horrible?

I hope everyone gets theirs soon! In fact I'm surprised of the mess it has become, I thought they would have been making these for months and had a huge stock built up :eek:

Dyr

drunkmonkey wrote: »

What do you think of the controllers as they are and what the rift ones may possibly be like in comparison?

They're brilliant but if the rift actually comes good on the promise of tracking individual fingers then obviously that would be even better. When I was trying to imagine what a hand controller would be like for VR back around the DK1 days I thought it would be a ring configuration around the fingers like the rift touch has

I don't believe cameras will track anywhere near as well as lasers do though.

GekkePrutser

drunkmonkey wrote: »

The CV1 won't be doing roomscale, Luckey said it's not who there pitching the rift at, it also needs a second camera connected to the PC which probably involves a 25ft cable to wrap around the room.
I think buying the rift in the belief it will have roomscale and a better touch experience than the Vive is a mistake. Luckey's great at making statements, not great at living up to them though. I'd say you've a lot to worry about.

This guy thinks the Oculus is better. Or rather, if he could only buy one that he'd buy the Oculus. Personally I think they're pretty evenly matched. He says that too.

Also, This guy tested the motion tracking with one camera and got a pretty good range.

jumbobreakfast

The problem with the oculus cameras is that you need to use USB 3.0 ports so you can't put one in opposite corners of the room (max USB 3 cable length is 3 metres). This means that your touch controllers can lose tracking if you have your back to the cameras and your controllers in front of you. The vive base stations don't connect to your PC so don't have the same limitation. Even if the rift cameras change to USB 2.0 then you still can only use 5 metres of cable. They'd want to allow you to daisy chain them or something to try and stretch to room scale coverage...or maybe mirrors would work?

I hope the touch controllers work out well for them, Oculus have hinted that you can rest them on your legs while using the finger tracking which sounds pretty cool.

lmimmfn

MarkAnthony wrote: »

I'm on the late may to 2nd June. Feckers. Still after my exams so maybe it's a blessing.

That sux man, but yeah silver lining
My rift arrived today, havnt even tried it yet as I have a crap case of man flu , grrr, hopefully tomorrow

Zillah

I think it is safe to say that Oculus have already worked out what the cable situation is going to be with the second camera.

Bambi wrote: »

I don't believe cameras will track anywhere near as well as lasers do though.

They're both cameras, though, aren't they? Rift has a camera attached to the PC and it watches the headset, whereas the Vive has lasers from stands and cameras on the headset which watch the lasers.

It's twelve of one and half a dozen of the other. But regardless of our expectations, the Tested guys said the Rift tracking is slightly more reliable.

At the end of the day, though, they're both amazing pieces of technology that track sub-mm movements, and the differences are really quite trivial. Once Touch is out we're going to have two largely identical systems.

GekkePrutser

jumbobreakfast wrote: »

The problem with the oculus cameras is that you need to use USB 3.0 ports so you can't put one in opposite corners of the room (max USB 3 cable length is 3 metres). This means that your touch controllers can lose tracking if you have your back to the cameras and your controllers in front of you. The vive base stations don't connect to your PC so don't have the same limitation. Even if the rift cameras change to USB 2.0 then you still can only use 5 metres of cable. They'd want to allow you to daisy chain them or something to try and stretch to room scale coverage...or maybe mirrors would work?

I hope the touch controllers work out well for them, Oculus have hinted that you can rest them on your legs while using the finger tracking which sounds pretty cool.

Well I know that with USB 2.0 you can use longer cables with a repeater in them (basically a single port powered hub). We use them at work. However I'm not sure of they are also available for USB 3.0. And if oculus would support them, they're very picky with USB controllers. My built-in controller in my Alienware X51 isn't even supported. Though it does work fine luckily.

GekkePrutser

Zillah wrote: »

They're both cameras, though, aren't they? Rift has a camera attached to the PC and it watches the headset, whereas the Vive has lasers from stands and cameras on the headset which watch the lasers.

I don't think the vive has cameras for detecting the lasers. Just simple IR sensors. So they can't sense the direction of the beam, just a 'hit'. But because the beam sweeps they won't have to, the exact timing of the hit can be used to establish direction from the lighthouse, as the lighthouse knows where the beam was pointing at any given point in time.

Cameras would be too expensive because it has so many of them, and the processing of all that data would be too much to handle.

I think it's a smart system, I think it will provide more accuracy at long distances, where the rift camera would be down to pixel level. So it's a good choice for roomscale, makes sense they went for it with the vive. For oculus their choice makes sense too, it's cheaper and well suited for short distances.

jumbobreakfast

Zillah wrote: »

They're both cameras, though, aren't they? Rift has a camera attached to the PC and it watches the headset, whereas the Vive has lasers from stands and cameras on the headset which watch the lasers. It's twelve of one and half a dozen of the other.

Nope, it's not. the Vive uses lasers and the dents you see on the headset are just light sensors, not cameras. That's why the Vive base stations don't have any cable length restrictions and also why any Oculus dual camera setups have the cameras at adjacent walls rather than opposite corners. There is also a camera on the Vive but it's not for tracking, it's a handy feature that gives you a view of the real world if you need it so you can find your phone or type on your keyboard.

Vive is inside out tracking where the headset is responding to laser from the base stations and the headset sends that info to the PC whereas the rift is outside-in where the camera is seeing the headset IR LEDs and it is feeding it to your PC.

Zillah wrote: »

But regardless of our expectations, the Tested guys said the Rift tracking is slightly more reliable.

They had problems but I only lost controller tracking once or twice. wiggling it for just a second brought it back in. There is a known problem with the camera on the vive and valve tell you if you get tracking glitches, either turn down the camera polling rate or try a different USB port. Perhaps that's the problem they had? who knows? They were comparing sitting down with no tracked hand controllers to the Vive with controllers and room scale tracking.

I think you're getting a bit hung up on which is best...it doesn't really matter, both are first generation hardware and both have problems. Early adopters like ourselves are paying a high price for equipment that people will laugh at in a few years

GekkePrutser wrote: »

Well I know that with USB 2.0 you can use longer cables with a repeater in them (basically a single port powered hub). We use them at work. However I'm not sure of they are also available for USB 3.0. And if oculus would support them, they're very picky with USB controllers. My built-in controller in my Alienware X51 isn't even supported. Though it does work fine luckily.

Yes this could work but could add latency. Since both headsets render at 90 frames per second then that means you need to have your tracking updating at least every 11 milliseconds so any added delay will cause problems.

Perhaps optical thunderbolt cables will solve these problems

Zillah

jumbobreakfast wrote: »

I think you're getting a bit hung up on which is best...

In the very post you quoted I said:
"At the end of the day, though, they're both amazing pieces of technology that track sub-mm movements, and the differences are really quite trivial. Once Touch is out we're going to have two largely identical systems."

I'm not hung up at all, I think they're both amazing.

Dyr

On tracking: Developer says both controllers are pretty much the same.

As are the headsets and the software framework

Only difference is the tracking solutions

http://www.polygon.com/2016/4/12/11414090/oculus-rift-htc-vive-fantastic-contraption

ScumLord

The vive definitely has the tracking system with the lowest processing overhead. All they have to do is deal with raw numbers.

The rift is using a slightly more complicated system but it's a type of tracking that has been developed for a while, your webcam can do basic tracking without taxing your computer much, so I'd say rifts processing overhead while higher, isn't high enough to slow a PC down in the slightest.

There may be advantages to the rift using a more complicated tracking system in the long run?

Dyr

ScumLord wrote: »

The vive definitely has the tracking system with the lowest processing overhead. All they have to do is deal with raw numbers.

The rift is using a slightly more complicated system but it's a type of tracking that has been developed for a while, your webcam can do basic tracking without taxing your computer much, so I'd say rifts processing overhead while higher, isn't high enough to slow a PC down in the slightest.

There may be advantages to the rift using a more complicated tracking system in the long run?

tbh I would have thought the vives tracking has an advantage in terms of latency at least.

ScumLord

Bambi wrote: »

tbh I would have thought the vives tracking has an advantage in terms of latency at least.

Definitely. But as was pointed out earlier, the vive doesn't see the player, it see's the world around the player and interprets the player. The rift can actually "see" the player, it's tracking is based on looking at what the player is doing.

I don't know what they could do with that.

Zillah

I read a post on Reddit about a guy that had two graphics cards and had both the Rift and the Vive running perfectly well. These applications are not processor capped in the slightest, so which uses more CPU is academic.

However, I also read that the Vive background app hovers at 20% cpu all the time - much higher than the Rift. Their best guess is that Chaperone requires a bit of CPU for generating the visual overlay.

Zillah

Bambi wrote: »

tbh I would have thought the vives tracking has an advantage in terms of latency at least.

Again, regardless of our expectations (whatever that means - imagination?), both headsets track perfectly in real time.

Dyr

Zillah wrote: »

Again, regardless of our expectations (whatever that means - imagination?), both headsets track perfectly in real time.

Yes but mine tracks more perfectly

Doge

Valve need to do this with the HTC Vive!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFKjWGxZqk

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

The reviews are all putting it in a different space to the oculus, the video is impressive:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYfNzhLXYGc

Doge wrote: »

Valve need to do this with the HTC Vive!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFKjWGxZqk

They already did? Watch someone throw the chap the controller at the start (.49 sec) while he's wearing the headset, can't see anyone managing that in an oculus.

Doge

drunkmonkey wrote: »

They already did? Watch someone throw the chap the controller at the start (.49 sec) while he's wearing the headset, can't see anyone managing that in an oculus.

I don't mean in post processing!

I mean in real time using the integrated Camera, so you would see exactly what it shown in that video, when you have the headset on.

They seriously need to make this work for Simulators! I would buy one in the morning and build a VR gaming rig if they did!

drunkmonkey

I'm not getting you, he can't see the real steering wheel or gear stick but he can see the virtual one, that's what it's like to play sims in VR, I've a Logitech G27 I use for sims its perfect using it in VR exactly like the video down to leaning out the window in Euro Truck simulator when your backing up the truck.

Doge

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm not getting you, he can't see the real steering wheel or gear stick but he can see the virtual one, that's what it's like to play sims in VR, I've a Logitech G27 I use for sims its perfect using it in VR exactly like the video down to leaning out the window in Euro Truck simulator when your backing up the truck.

He can't see it, but with the HTC Vive it *might* be possible to do this in real time!

Since it can overlay objects in the room when you get too near by using the camera, then it may also be possible to do the same with the racing wheel, handbrake and gear shifter by using some form of processing to remove the green screen.

Do you understand now what I'm getting at?

Dyr

Doge wrote: »

He can't see it, but with the HTC Vive it *might* be possible to do this in real time!

Since it can overlay objects in the room when you get too near by using the camera, then it may also be possible to do the same with the racing wheel, handbrake and gear shifter by using some form of processing to remove the green screen.

Do you understand now what I'm getting at?

The camera can't discriminate, it will show you the outline of everything in shot
You'd have to integrate the wheel and shifter into the htc vive itself so a virtual version of it would appear. Thats how the vive controllers work

Or just use the vive controllers and an interactive dash to replace the wheel/shifter etc which is the easiest solution