Windows 10 VR from $299

[porina]

Quote

Microsoft revealed Acer, Asus, Dell, HP and Lenovo will manufacture new Windows 10-compatible virtual reality headsets, which will fill the wearer's view with computer-powered visuals.

It said the lowest-cost model would be $299 (£245). That is several times cheaper than the video games-focused Oculus Rift and HTC Vive headsets already on sale.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37779983

 

For those having a problem with the cost of VR, might this be the lower cost revolution? I don't see any technical details on it yet, like what are they doing to get the price that low. Or more to the point, what are they NOT doing? Is this going to be little more than a glorified mobile-like solution? If this takes off, will it be at the cost of Rift/Vive?

 

[NumLock21]

In other news, the VR headset will have a sticker on it that says Certified for Windows 10.

[Sakkura]

Grabbed a pic from the Anandtech live blog:

 

 

Probably going to be pretty crappy, but if it helps VR adoption I'm down.

[dalekphalm]

2 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Grabbed a pic from the Anandtech live blog:

 

 

Probably going to be pretty crappy, but if it helps VR adoption I'm down.

Looks very similar to the PSVR in physical styling. Definitely looks less premium compared to the Rift and Vive, but for the price tag, that's expected.

[ZimFreak]

I'm leery because I'm not a huge fan of mobile VR. Too many people try the Gear VR or god forbid Google Cardboard and are hugely unimpressed. They think "Oh, that's VR? Ok..." And then they never try a Vive or Rift because they assume they're all the same.

 

Bad VR will kill VR.

[porina]

Note it says "starting at", so... there will be more expensive solutions? Note I say solutions, as I suspect they might vary the accessories that come with it. Will it be view only? That would limit its usefulness, unless there is some controller to go with it. What if the base headset was 299, but it's another 50 for a controller, and another xx for whatever... again, we need some more details to see how the value really stacks up.

[fjdhdhcyfhf]

i think the 299 is the price without any controllers so you can watch movies etc

[christianled59]

21 minutes ago, ZimFreak said:

I'm leery because I'm not a huge fan of mobile VR. Too many people try the Gear VR or god forbid Google Cardboard and are hugely unimpressed. They think "Oh, that's VR? Ok..." And then they never try a Vive or Rift because they assume they're all the same.

 

Bad VR will kill VR.

100% agree. I have so many friends who had the same experience. Once I convinced them to try my Vive, they're blown away.

[Sakkura]

Microsoft describes the Rift and Vive as "less immersive" than their partner headsets.

 

I sense bullshit.

 

http://uploadvr.com/microsoft-fires-shots-rift-vive-calls-less-immersive-partner-headsets/

[dragosudeki]

17 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Microsoft describes the Rift and Vive as "less immersive" than their partner headsets.
 
I sense bullshit.

http://uploadvr.com/microsoft-fires-shots-rift-vive-calls-less-immersive-partner-headsets/

From that article:

Quote

That is according to Terry Myerson, Microsoft Executive Vice President of the Windows and Devices Group. “These headsets will be the first and only to ship with inside-out, six degrees of freedom sensors,” he said.

Quote

Plus, on the contrary to Myerson’s comments, Oculus does have an inside-out tracking headset and, unlike these devices, it’s standalone. Sadly, it only exists as a prototype right now, but perhaps today’s news might prompt the company to move a bit faster.

So yeah, I guess it might be less immersive than other headsets not out right now, but they also are talking about their current not out headset. Hope that is the actual price, the headset is comfortable, and this ain't locked down to the Windows Store (or whatever the hell that shit is called).

[Sakkura]

Just now, dragosudeki said:

So yeah, I guess it might be less immersive than other headsets not out right now, but they also are talking about their current not out headset. Hope that is the actual price, the headset is comfortable, and this ain't locked down to the Windows Store (or whatever the hell that shit is called).

It's not "the" headset, as there are multiple versions from different vendors.

 

Inside-out tracking isn't more immersive though, and in fact presents the risk of lower tracking fidelity -> more VR sickness. Really depends how well it's implemented, of course. But as long as the headsets are still wired, there's very little advantage to inside-out tracking. All it means is you don't have to set up cameras/sensors/base stations.

[dalekphalm]

13 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

It's not "the" headset, as there are multiple versions from different vendors.

 

Inside-out tracking isn't more immersive though, and in fact presents the risk of lower tracking fidelity -> more VR sickness. Really depends how well it's implemented, of course. But as long as the headsets are still wired, there's very little advantage to inside-out tracking. All it means is you don't have to set up cameras/sensors/base stations.

For headsets that aren't going for the "Whole room" type experience, not having to setup a camera or sensor is actually a really big advantage, I'd say.

 

But it depends on what type of VR experience they're looking to provide for each headset. For example, I assume the base model ($299) isn't going to provide walk around experience.

[Sakkura]

1 minute ago, dalekphalm said:

For headsets that aren't going for the "Whole room" type experience, not having to setup a camera or sensor is actually a really big advantage, I'd say.

 

But it depends on what type of VR experience they're looking to provide for each headset. For example, I assume the base model ($299) isn't going to provide walk around experience.

Not a big advantage so long as it's still tethered. As I said, all it means is you don't have to plop down a camera or two.

 

It's a MUCH bigger advantage with an untethered device. Then it means you can go anywhere. Only constrained by where there's actually physically access (and WiFi range if it's using a separate PC for rendering).

[TetraSky]

As long as you can watch porn on it, it will sell. 

Though there really isn't much info on the VR headset itself.

[Doobeedoo]

Nice to see more VR headset approaches, haves their use. Though for myself I'll wait numerous generations until VR gets to more refined and better level of experience.

[Beskamir]

6 hours ago, Sakkura said:

Grabbed a pic from the Anandtech live blog:

Probably going to be pretty crappy, but if it helps VR adoption I'm down.

If it's going to be crappy then I doubt it will help VR adoption.

[Dabombinable]

As long as it makes a GTX 970 SLI setup viable....

[Sakkura]

1 hour ago, Doobeedoo said:

Nice to see more VR headset approaches, haves their use. Though for myself I'll wait numerous generations until VR gets to more refined and better level of experience.

If everyone thinks like that it won't get to that better level.

[AresKrieger]

Well I'm going to guess it will suck, but even if it didn't I still don't see the point of modern VR as it's less fluid than simply using a controller and has numerous downsides currently like eye strain nausea etc.

 

VR tried to come out too early for it's own good

[Sakkura]

1 minute ago, AresKrieger said:

Well I'm going to guess it will suck, but even if it didn't I still don't see the point of modern VR as it's less fluid than simply using a controller and has numerous downsides currently like eye strain nausea etc.

 

VR tried to come out too early for it's own good

"Less fluid?" Wow, luddites keep coming up with new BS about VR.

 

Haven't run into any eye strain. Nausea depends on your personal sensitivity and the content; stick to the less intense content and >90% of people will have no issues.

 

VR did try to come out too early for its own good. In the 1990s. It's been 20 years, now it's ready.

[AresKrieger]

19 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

"Less fluid?" Wow, luddites keep coming up with new BS about VR.

As in VR controls are still a bit flawed, things like movement are still clunky and motion controllers are still not accurate enough for really precise movement, this only applies when not using a controller of course but at that point it is simply playing a game with a screen on your face with the only VR aspect being turning your head to look around. 

 

Anyway call me a luddite if you want but frankly I'll simply just wait until the products get more polished and don't have an "early adopter tax" price tag.

[boblikepie]

I hope this starts us on the route that any headset will work with a vr compatible game/app just like I can use any monitor for my pc.

[zMeul]

only SONY and now MS understood how to make VR for the consumer, HTC and FB did not

[AlTech]

15 minutes ago, zMeul said:

only SONY and now MS understood how to make VR for the consumer, HTC and FB did not

How so?

[zMeul]

5 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

How so?

price point