Valve Bets Big On VR's Future: Still Innovating Hardware, Preparing To Launch Software

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Contributor

Kevin Carbotte is a contributing writer for Tom's Hardware who primarily covers VR and AR hardware. He has been writing for us for more than four years.

  • bit_user
    He speculated that soon, VR HMDs would offer higher resolutions than any other display option available.
    If display resolution outpaces GPU advancements, you haven't really solved anything.
    Reply
  • whiteodian
    If Vive was 80% cheaper, I'd buy one today. They are smoking something. Yeah, without games it's doomed, but they are clueless about moving product. It's just too damn expensive for the average Joe to want to get one.
    Reply
  • dstarr3
    19303882 said:
    If Vive was 80% cheaper, I'd buy one today. They are smoking something. Yeah, without games it's doomed, but they are clueless about moving product. It's just too damn expensive for the average Joe to want to get one.

    The first generation of new tech always is very expensive, because the first generation is the one that has to recoup the costs of alllllllll of that expensive R&D. That's years and years of spending money and making none of it back that they need to make good on. The second generation is always much cheaper, once all those bills have been paid. And hopefully we do get to see a revision from HTC or Oculus for... approaching half the price would be great.

    But is $800 really that outrageous? Enthusiasts spend as much on a single gaming monitor. Or consider two midrange monitors and a gaming mouse/keyboard. That can easily reach over $800. It's an enthusiast price for enthusiast customers. But that notwithstanding, the cost will come down eventually. It'll have to if the tech wants to survive. While you can spend $800 on a gaming monitor, you can also spend $200 and be perfectly happy if your expectations are appropriate. And most people have $200 expectations, so if we could give them a $200 VR solution, problem solved.
    Reply
  • anbello262
    19303882 said:
    If Vive was 80% cheaper, I'd buy one today. They are smoking something. Yeah, without games it's doomed, but they are clueless about moving product. It's just too damn expensive for the average Joe to want to get one.

    I am really attracted to the whole idea of VR.

    And even if the vive was 80% cheaper, around $150, I would't feel very compelled to get it, because there's barely enough content to be a true "gaming peripheral", and there are lots of things that still need ironing. No point in getting something that feels like a development prototype. And I have a powerful enough pc already, so no extra expense (apart from the games).

    So I can imagine not wanting a Vive if you also have to upgrade your PC, find room in your house and be extremely careful with the lenses to avoid scratches.

    When you only have a few great experiences, and many somewhat good experiences, but almost no good/great 'Games', there is not much reason to go thtough all the trouble of setting up VR.
    Reply
  • coolitic
    Potential Half-Life 3 memes everywhere...
    Reply
  • bit_user
    19303882 said:
    If Vive was 80% cheaper, I'd buy one today. They are smoking something.
    Agreed. I bought OSVR HDK2, when it was on sale for $300. About 50% of the reason was Linux support (which I've heard ain't great) and the rest was just down to price & the fact that I don't plan to do anything roomscale.

    I mean, let's face it, these HMDs are gonna be obsolete faster than anything else in my PC, and yet they're more expensive than any component (okay, I originally paid $1k for one of my monitors, but that was 12 years ago).

    Now, I'm not trying to debate whether the price is justified. I think we're just responding to the claim that HMD price isn't such a significant factor in sales volume.
    Reply
  • jossrik
    For me it's just that the tech just isn't there yet. AND, the tech right now is great. I have a pretty nice PC and got to play as much as I want with my little brothers Rift DK2. As awesome as it is, the content just isn't there yet for me to go and get a retail of anything, as was said, we're still really in a developer phase. The difference between a developer kit and retail isn't that great. I want better screens and higher pixels/refresh. For me the low res of the DK2 and relative low res for the mainstream screens is a deal breaker, it really breaks the immersion that could easily be there. But here's the problem, even on my pretty decent computer, pushing two low res pictures was a chore, I can't imagine what photo realistic 4k or beyond (I heard some one say that 8k per eye was ideal, I don't recall where right now though...) will require. There are HMDs that are higher resolution, but then we fall back to those aren't readily supported resolutions and the reviews of the HMDs are dismal at best. The guy who said the 800$ is an easy price to justify is only half the picture. 800$ is easy to justify if you're going to be using it a lot. On the strength of the DK2 we just bought the PSVR for RE7, tomorrow I get to try it out, what I hear is that it's pretty awesome, but even with REs good replayability, 500$ for a peripheral for one game, not everyone can justify that.
    Reply
  • littlelostlinden
    You people are forgetting all about the eye herpies these devices spread. Ich!
    Reply
  • bit_user
    19304499 said:
    I want better screens and higher pixels/refresh. For me the low res of the DK2 and relative low res for the mainstream screens is a deal breaker,
    Isn't DK2 960x1080 per eye @ 75 Hz? Rift and Vive are a bit higher and 90 Hz. Let's call them a half-step in the right direction.

    19304499 said:
    we just bought the PSVR for RE7, tomorrow I get to try it out, what I hear is that it's pretty awesome,
    LOL, it's the same resolution as DK2! Clearly, resolution isn't really a deal breaker for you.
    Reply
  • jossrik
    19304671 said:
    19304499 said:
    I want better screens and higher pixels/refresh. For me the low res of the DK2 and relative low res for the mainstream screens is a deal breaker,
    Isn't DK2 960x1080 per eye @ 75 Hz? Rift and Vive are a bit higher and 90 Hz. Let's call them a half-step in the right direction.

    19304499 said:
    we just bought the PSVR for RE7, tomorrow I get to try it out, what I hear is that it's pretty awesome,
    LOL, it's the same resolution as DK2! Clearly, resolution isn't really a deal breaker for you.

    No, Resolution isn't everything, on the DK2 for me it was the screen dooring that put me off from retail. 2nd, I didn't buy the PSVR. That was all my little brother, so ya, I'll try it. You are close though, maybe a 1/4 step in the right direction, we're headed there. Looked at a Chinese HMD with 4k displays, but alas HDMI 1.4 input, and the reviews I could find on it were pretty harsh. With the DK2, the 1kx1k screens look pretty crummy. You can see the potential and I love using it, but I wouldn't buy one for my aging parents either. The VR groups want this to be as popular as the computer monitor is today, and that's just not gonna happen for a long long while. There are significant hurdles other than cost for it to replace monitors. One of the reasons I said resolution was a biggie for me is that I game in 4k, and while there is very little in the way of 4k movies and television, games look hella fantastic. For a comparison, go from a 1080p image to the same thing in SD. 352x240. It's a big jump, and while the game isn't all about graphics (I still play RE4), graphics can help a bad game overcome, and for some games it's just as important as all the other factors (won't get into what makes a game great, but there's a reason Pong is no longer on the top 10, well, lots of reasons, but I digress).

    VR today is almost like black and white televisions. The vision is there, but it will be a long time coming before everyone's grandma has one. With the speed that tech evolves and everything seems to be moving I tend to believe that stuff like the neural thingie on Sword Art will only be 20 years out. Course when we went to the moon we thought Mars was right around the corner too.
    Reply