>Room scale works well in Rift. Notably, there was a 15×11 room-scale test by Palmer Luckey himself[1],
One camera Oculus setups mean 180 degree roomscale, which is fairly limiting compared to the Vives native 360 degree support which is shipping right now. We have no idea what the Rift roomscale consumer product will look like as it literally isn't for sale. Comparing the Vive implementation to an idealized hypothetical is absolutely unfair here. Also Luckey isn't exactly a non-biased reviewer. I think there are going to be issues with the USB camera image processing approach especially when we start talking about 2 or 3 cameras at the same time.
See "Building 180 Degrees on the Rift/PSVR" from an Owlchemy dev:
Considering Owlchemy is making a 180 degree version of its game for the Rift and PSVR, I suspect the Rift motion, when it finally ships, won't be 360.
Heck, the Vive even has a front facing camera to make sure you don't bump into things during your roomscale playing. Sure it adds a little weigh, but I'd rather have a headset that's a mere 3oz heavier that can protect me from serious injury than losing 3oz.
Rift games play better on the Vive due to roomscale support and chaperone!
"In fact, Kuchera notes that the port of Dreamdeck (a VR demo sampler that shows off varying animation styles) is actually better on the Vive, as the headset's enhanced tracking functionality allows you to actually walk around the scenes. "The Vive's chaperone system, which shows you the limits of your play space, also works just fine on the Rift titles," writes Kuchera."
The other things you mention are third-party hacks, which of course work on the Vive as well. There's nothing magical about the Rift here.
>The Vive is not immune to shipping controversy and severe miscommunication[2]
Every promised April order is set to ship in April. Some people thought it meant April 5th, which was incorrect. Comparing that to a multi-month delay from the Oculus people is asinine. The only real issue is that some banks rejected HTC's charge for whatever reason. That's a bank issue, not an HTC issue. HTC can't call your bank and say, "Hey guys, this near $1000 charge is totally legit." You need to.
>that Oculus has a simpler out-of-the-box experience;
When you ship a device that has no motion control, no roomscale, etc yeah of course its going to be simpler the same way a tricycle is simpler than a race car.
I think its pretty obvious that Oculus shipped an uncooked product and the Vive has leapfrogged ahead of them. People want motion control and roomscale. People want shipments on the month they were promised. I expect the 2017 Rift to be better, but right now, if you want to do real VR, there's no comparision.
Here's a video of a teen girl literally crying during the Brookhaven Experiment. This sense of presence is a Vive-only experience:
The Rift cannot do this, period. It cannot put an enemy behind you or sneak up on you and have you turn around to shoot it or dodge it. It may one day, but until that day comes, the VR crown goes to the Vive. Worse for Oculus, the Vive will always have a 6-9 month lead over the Rift. By the time the Rift does roomscale, the Vive will already be exploring next steps. I also believe that Valve is a better organization to have a leadership role in the future of VR from both a political and technical perspective. Facebook/Oculus has already made many questionable moves (exclusives, constant connection to FB servers after installing the Oculus software, promoting a closed ecosystem, hiding the component shortage issue until the last minute, lying about "ballpark" pricing, falling behind in terms of touch controllers and roomscale, etc).
>There's an significant amount of fanboyism and internet-defense-force allegations
Physician, heal thyself. The disigenious damage control you're doing for Oculus is a perfect example of that very thing you're criticizing. The Rift clearly hasn't caught up to the Vive. I don't see why this is so hard to accept.
> Every promised April order is set to ship in April. Some people thought it meant April 5th, which was incorrect. Comparing that to a multi-month delay from the Oculus people is asinine.
> Physician, heal thyself. The disigenious damage control you're doing for Oculus is a perfect example of that very thing you're criticizing.
I think it's silly to proclaim either platform as the "winner" when 1. the Oculus hasn't even been out for a full month yet and 2. the Vive isn't even done shipping it's first promised batch.
I'd probably buy a Vive now if I were to choose today, but I also think one month out, there's zero need to defend (or criticize the viability of) either platform. It's simply too new.
> I think it's silly to proclaim either platform as the "winner"
I do not see anyone saying either is the outright winner.
I said the Oculus is behind. The Tested review said about the same thing as you are, which is if you could choose just one right now to use for the next 12 months, use the Vive [1]
> one month out, there's zero need to defend (or criticize the viability of) either platform
Tons of consumers want reviews of each system so they can make a judgement of which one to buy. Reasonable people want to see both products succeed and provide competition to each other.
One camera Oculus setups mean 180 degree roomscale, which is fairly limiting compared to the Vives native 360 degree support which is shipping right now. We have no idea what the Rift roomscale consumer product will look like as it literally isn't for sale. Comparing the Vive implementation to an idealized hypothetical is absolutely unfair here. Also Luckey isn't exactly a non-biased reviewer. I think there are going to be issues with the USB camera image processing approach especially when we start talking about 2 or 3 cameras at the same time.
See "Building 180 Degrees on the Rift/PSVR" from an Owlchemy dev:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Vive/comments/41ezln/job_simulator_...
Considering Owlchemy is making a 180 degree version of its game for the Rift and PSVR, I suspect the Rift motion, when it finally ships, won't be 360.
Heck, the Vive even has a front facing camera to make sure you don't bump into things during your roomscale playing. Sure it adds a little weigh, but I'd rather have a headset that's a mere 3oz heavier that can protect me from serious injury than losing 3oz.
Rift games play better on the Vive due to roomscale support and chaperone!
"In fact, Kuchera notes that the port of Dreamdeck (a VR demo sampler that shows off varying animation styles) is actually better on the Vive, as the headset's enhanced tracking functionality allows you to actually walk around the scenes. "The Vive's chaperone system, which shows you the limits of your play space, also works just fine on the Rift titles," writes Kuchera."
http://www.theverge.com/2016/4/14/11429436/oculus-rift-games...
>If the launch lineup of 30 games[7] doesn't convince you, and you're not interested in Minecraft[9]
The Vive has just as many if not more. And yes you can play Minecraft on the Vive too.
http://store.steampowered.com/tag/en/VR/#p=0&tab=NewReleases
The other things you mention are third-party hacks, which of course work on the Vive as well. There's nothing magical about the Rift here.
>The Vive is not immune to shipping controversy and severe miscommunication[2]
Every promised April order is set to ship in April. Some people thought it meant April 5th, which was incorrect. Comparing that to a multi-month delay from the Oculus people is asinine. The only real issue is that some banks rejected HTC's charge for whatever reason. That's a bank issue, not an HTC issue. HTC can't call your bank and say, "Hey guys, this near $1000 charge is totally legit." You need to.
http://blog.htcvive.com/us/2016/04/vive-shipment-updates/
>that Oculus has a simpler out-of-the-box experience;
When you ship a device that has no motion control, no roomscale, etc yeah of course its going to be simpler the same way a tricycle is simpler than a race car.
I think its pretty obvious that Oculus shipped an uncooked product and the Vive has leapfrogged ahead of them. People want motion control and roomscale. People want shipments on the month they were promised. I expect the 2017 Rift to be better, but right now, if you want to do real VR, there's no comparision.
Here's a video of a teen girl literally crying during the Brookhaven Experiment. This sense of presence is a Vive-only experience:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0V2OqAOfhcU&nohtml5=False
or this guy jumping around trying to avoid zombies:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27MUcNL-R8Y&nohtml5=False
The Rift cannot do this, period. It cannot put an enemy behind you or sneak up on you and have you turn around to shoot it or dodge it. It may one day, but until that day comes, the VR crown goes to the Vive. Worse for Oculus, the Vive will always have a 6-9 month lead over the Rift. By the time the Rift does roomscale, the Vive will already be exploring next steps. I also believe that Valve is a better organization to have a leadership role in the future of VR from both a political and technical perspective. Facebook/Oculus has already made many questionable moves (exclusives, constant connection to FB servers after installing the Oculus software, promoting a closed ecosystem, hiding the component shortage issue until the last minute, lying about "ballpark" pricing, falling behind in terms of touch controllers and roomscale, etc).
>There's an significant amount of fanboyism and internet-defense-force allegations
Physician, heal thyself. The disigenious damage control you're doing for Oculus is a perfect example of that very thing you're criticizing. The Rift clearly hasn't caught up to the Vive. I don't see why this is so hard to accept.