Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Oculus Rift Development Kit 2: Another Eyes-On

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 45 comments

We take a look at the new development kit.

This week during GTC 2014, Oculus VR was showcasing its latest developer kit for the Oculus Rift, DK2. Unlike what I experienced back in November, this $350 kit featured a near infrared CMOS sensor, with an update rate of 60 Hz, placed directly in front of me to catch every single body movement.

As previously reported, this version of the Rift features a resolution of 1080 x 960 per eye, and it clearly shows. The visuals look a lot more refined than the HD version I tested back in November. With this version I didn't see any pixilation whatsoever, allowing me to jump eyes first into an immersive experience.

Read more: How Facebook's Oculus Buy Changes Future of Rift, VR

According to the specs, the refresh rates are 75 Hz, 72 Hz and 60 Hz, and the persistence is 2 ms, 3 ms and full. The viewing optics provide a nominal 100 degree field of view. The headset also features a gyroscope, accelerometer and a magnetometer, with an update rate of 1000 Hz.

"DK2 isn't identical to the consumer Rift, but the fundamental building blocks for great VR are there. All the content developed using DK2 will work with the consumer Rift. And while the overall experience still needs to improve before it's consumer-ready, we're getting closer everyday — DK2 is not the Holodeck yet, but it's a major step in the right direction," states Oculus VR in a recent blog.

For this demo, Oculus allowed two people to play Couch Knights, a deathmatch title from Epic Games involving swords, shields, a virtual living room and the UE4 engine. Players sit in a virtual chair, controlling action-figure sized avatars in a living room setting. You can move the warrior avatar all around the immediate area, but the players remain glued to their seats.

What was seemingly new in my experience was the ability to turn my head in a number of directions and angles while the room remained in place. In other words, the camera can see that I'm turning or tilting my head, leaning forward to see my feet, and more. Thus the game renders the environment so that you feel that you're really sitting in a room with furniture and another player.

That said, I didn't see the blurred visuals I experienced with the first developer kit and the HD version shown back in November. My experience was incredibly smooth, and a sign that Oculus VR is getting closer to a retail release. When that will be I don't know, but the Rift will definitely be worth the wait.

Read more: Eyes-in with Project Morpheus vs. Oculus Rift

Discuss
Add your comment Display all 45 comments.
Top Comments
  • 14 Hide
    everlast66 , March 27, 2014 11:10 AM
    They could rename it to Judas Rift now.
  • 13 Hide
    wanderer11 , March 27, 2014 10:38 AM
    I think everyone lost all their interest in Oculus once facebook bought them.
  • 12 Hide
    nitrium , March 27, 2014 12:46 PM
    If you NEED a Facebook account to use the Rift, I sure as hell won't be getting one. Like the Minecraft developer said, "We were in talks about maybe bringing a version of Minecraft to Oculus. I just cancelled that deal. Facebook creeps me out." The last sentence echo's my sentiments exactly. Facebook creeps me out too.
Other Comments
  • 13 Hide
    wanderer11 , March 27, 2014 10:38 AM
    I think everyone lost all their interest in Oculus once facebook bought them.
  • 14 Hide
    everlast66 , March 27, 2014 11:10 AM
    They could rename it to Judas Rift now.
  • 2 Hide
    spartanmk2 , March 27, 2014 11:14 AM
    Benedict Rift Arnold.
  • 7 Hide
    everlast66 , March 27, 2014 11:17 AM
    Sony could not have hoped for a better present!And, yes, Project Morpheus is not only PS4, it has been demoed on the PC.http://www.roadtovr.com/sony-project-morpheus-dev-kits-delivered-early-june/
  • 2 Hide
    stevo777 , March 27, 2014 11:27 AM
    They pretty much made Oculus from off the shelf parts. I don't see why some people from Tom's don't get together and start their own project. Most of us build PC's from off the shelf stuff.
  • 11 Hide
    Dexter Kairaiuak , March 27, 2014 11:43 AM
    I was going to take the red pill. Now i'll take the blue pill. Thank you Morpheus.
  • -3 Hide
    tristangl , March 27, 2014 11:59 AM
    Quote:
    I think everyone lost all their interest in Oculus once facebook bought them.
    I did not!!
  • 8 Hide
    ikaz , March 27, 2014 12:12 PM
    The problem is that now FB can decide what direction the rift goes as far as development goes. FB is not an investment firm as far as stocks goes so when they spend 2B on it they have a good idea of what they want to do with the tech and I'm not aware of FB developing any full pc games (which is what most people were excited about).
  • 12 Hide
    nitrium , March 27, 2014 12:46 PM
    If you NEED a Facebook account to use the Rift, I sure as hell won't be getting one. Like the Minecraft developer said, "We were in talks about maybe bringing a version of Minecraft to Oculus. I just cancelled that deal. Facebook creeps me out." The last sentence echo's my sentiments exactly. Facebook creeps me out too.
  • -6 Hide
    mavikt , March 27, 2014 12:48 PM
    Vaporware is a word that has begun popping up in my head when I see news about Oculus Rift. How many years has gone by since the Kick-starter campaign started? With the kick-starter money, the venture capital and dev kit sales I can't imagine they have been underfunded. It's not like they're inventing something never heard of before. COTS components, perhaps an ASIC, a casing and some software; It shouldn't take half a decade. The only good I can see come from FB is giving them an incentive to finalize the product, so they can get their $2 billion back (I'm not sure that's good though...). I hope it'll still be "affordable" once released, but it seems like the price just went up, $2 billion.
  • 10 Hide
    skit75 , March 27, 2014 12:51 PM
    This was Kickstarter funded. Where was Mark back then? It isn't about a "cliquey" PC world so much as it is about the technology being sniped from the community that got it off the ground and the perceived loss of said community's control. It is whatever FB wants it to be now. Hey Mark, would you mind reimbursing the Kickstarters who got this off the ground for you, if it ever becomes profitable?
  • 8 Hide
    rwinches , March 27, 2014 1:15 PM
    They stated you don't need a FB account, but things change.

    For example.
    I went to make a comment on HuffPo, I haven't logged-in in months, but when I tried. they requested my FB credentials and stated I would, from now on, be identified using my FB account name... WTF
    They had previously said only new members would be required to follow any new rules.
  • 5 Hide
    RooD , March 27, 2014 2:05 PM
    No thanks, was ready to pull the trigger on a dk2 and a consumer model.not anymore
  • -2 Hide
    RooD , March 27, 2014 2:27 PM
    Til,dr
  • 7 Hide
    RooD , March 27, 2014 2:32 PM
    Seriously, vote with your dollar and let this flop. Without early adopters Rift is screwed. I used to tell my friends and family about it and was going to show them once I got one. Now I tell them what happened and that its a garbage product.
  • -2 Hide
    cracklint , March 27, 2014 2:34 PM
    Occulus was bound to be snatched up by someone. How else are the supposed compete. There still have many hurdles to overcome. Even with the successfully kick starter , the extra 75 million and the sale of dev kits, there is no way they can beat Sony to market and match their R&D. Everyone was watching Occulus. I would like to hear from those actually working on the project before I throw them under the bus and call them sell outs. The may be completely excited to have budget constraints lifted. 1. gotta have lower latency / quicker refresh rates for a smooth nauseous free experience. 2. the screen could still use refinement /higher resolution3. The weight still needs to be reduced and redistributed, newer or alternative materials need to be explored4. They need to be first to market and they need their Brand established. From a marketing perspective, it's not a bad move, maybe even genius.5. I am sure they have applied for new patents since alot of the implementation of the tech is new , they will need facebooks funds and lawyers to protect their IP. I love indie projects and the community that supports them, but this may be the turning point in the way we consume entertainment. As the tech becomes wireless and portable the possibilities may be endless to more practical applications.
  • -7 Hide
    stevejnb , March 27, 2014 2:41 PM
    Quote:
    This was Kickstarter funded. Where was Mark back then? It isn't about a "cliquey" PC world so much as it is about the technology being sniped from the community that got it off the ground and the perceived loss of said community's control. It is whatever FB wants it to be now. Hey Mark, would you mind reimbursing the Kickstarters who got this off the ground for you, if it ever becomes profitable?


    "Perceived loss of community control"? Oh, I'm sorry, I take back everything I said. Did they bring you in on their design meetings? Consult you before making any major decisions as to where the project was doing and insisted that your word was in some way defining? Did anyone who was actually had any sort of final say in where the project went sign some sort of document saying that they were going to keep the community in control of the project? No? Ok, then I take nothing back. This project was never yours and acting like it is after the fact is just throwing a tantrum.

    What they did with kickstarter was say "We're going to build this. Will you give us money to help us do it?" Giving them money never gave anyone who helped fund them even the most remote say in what they chose to do with it as the project went on. The idea of "community control" was never anything but a woefully misguided fantasy. Kickstarter in no way gives you ownership of the project, and I have no idea why you think OR was some sort of exception to this.

    They asked for money so they could build a product that they could sell to a big company that would back it so it might actually become something Why is everyone so surprised when they found that backer? And yes, it IS cliquey, because if it had been some "cool" company (Valve, Google, Sony, whoever) that picked it up, you'd all be jumping up and down with joy.
  • 7 Hide
    Anonymous , March 27, 2014 3:04 PM
    I wonder how well the initial kickstarter funding would have gone, if they said from the start that they were making a new VR interface for Facebook. Of course I do realize that they probably didn't even consider Facebook as a potential buyer in the start, but y'know what I'm trying to say...
Display more comments
React To This Article