VR Support - Yes or No?

No but we all know that Gen 2 headsets are all in development.

 

No specific news of CV2, but there are different things Oculus works on behind the scenes (see links below). As the Vive Pro demonstrated just a bump in resolution is not enough for the second gen headsets. Better lenses, eye tracking combined with foveated rendering, hand tracking, s.o. must accompany higher resolutions.

There are also other companies, like Pimax, which are supposed to release new version of headsets in the near future.

https://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-research-becomes-facebook-reality-labs-creating-faster-leaps-ar-vr/
https://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-claims-breakthrough-in-hand-tracking-accuracy/
https://www.roadtovr.com/facebook-oculus-half-dome-prototype-vr-headset-140-degree-varifocal-f8/
https://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-res...s-next-gen-ar-vr-visuals-displayweek-keynote/

 

Doubt? No doubt at all. How many companies are developing VR headsets?
Someone hasn't been paying attention to Oculus prototypes.

About three months ago at the F8 Developer Conference they showed some new features and stuff they been working on.
They showed a prototype Oculus Rift dubbed the Half Dome, a Rift-like display prototype with its top shell removed. This revealed a moving-parts system that constantly shifted a headset's lenses with sub-millimeter precision. The companion video of a VR tester bringing a virtual item closer to her face, at which point the image immediately de-blurred, showing finer discernible details (particularly text).
A new set of lenses @ 140-degree FOV
Built-in hand tracking Oculus headset features.

VR is here to stay Michael.

 

Does anybody know the history of why 3D was abandoned in both gaming and video media?
Not jabbing at VR as to me it's just on back burner at a moment with triple A studios stopping releasing VR titles, just geniously curios, what went wrong with 3D technology, all new TVs had it.

 

To get 3D versions of films that were not originally filmed in 3D using those uber expensive cinema cameras they had to put in the effects post production and essentially it imo didn't produce the true 3D effect. Sales were not the best, at first there was a wave of post production movies but you would have to be a pretty big fan to go back and buy the 3D version. If sales are down they simply won't bother.
I don't know if LOTR ended up using those cameras later on but Avatar was the first and that movie was designed with 3D in mind from the beginning and it wasn't bad at all. Did you know the script was sitting for over a decade as he waited for the technology to become available?.
The TV 3D displays were not the same effect you got in the cinema, they were OK but far from exciting and if you were watching a 3D movie with post effect on the TV it just wasn't even worth sitting there with the glass on. Even now I don't do 3D cinema I've gone back to 2D.

The 3D effect essentially added depth to the scene and it was pretty gimmicky if the effect was being projected at the viewer, you know those first 3D tmovies where you would duck to miss the arrow or the knife coming at ya. Well they stopped doing those for one reason or another.

I think I see where you're heading with this and think about this, an Nvidia engineer recently said to run 1080 @ 60 FPS vs running VR @ 90 requires seven fold increase in performance.
VR just pushed all the graphics card guys to manufacture cards capable of this.
WinWin.

 

I don't know what do you mean by that, AFAIK there were no triple A studio games released yet. As I mentioned before, player numbers are still too small for those studios to consider releasing full VR games. But there are a lots of really great VR titles out there, but as with everything it depends on each one's taste...

 

You can read some analysis here. There was post release VR support from big studios, and today they just don't bother, remember Dirt4, just one example. Industry either losing hope or prefer to wait, not sure what though.
https://www.cnet.com/news/its-time-to-break-up-with-vr/

BTW, moving industry aside (to me both cinema and home TV 3D look equally poor and gimmicky), this blog brings into retrospective fate of 3D gaming, surprisingly Nvidia still religiosly support it, updating support with every new driver release.
https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/266791-high-end-vr-market-dead

 

Yeah, but that's the thing, post-release VR support rarely works well, exception maybe the racing and flying sims, other than these it's much more than just adding support for displaying the 3D world in the headsets using one of the VR API's. You have to nail locomotion, interaction with the world s.o., without these it won't have much success in VR. And in most cases it's just impossible, if you want a successful VR game you need to design the game with all these in mind.

Right now it just not worth the trouble for triple A studios, considering the small amount of additional copies they could sell by adding proper VR support, or even worse design a game mainly for VR. But with the growing number of VR players at one moment the extra trouble will bring in enough revenue to justify the effort. Time will tell when that will come...

 

I'm sure that some form of VR will be the future, but I don't think it will happen nearly as soon as most of you are hoping.

 

If it doesn't have VR I couldnt care less what features the game has !
"Spoiled kids"? This must be coming from a Poor kid who cant afford great Tech ! Get a better paying job or a second job and maybe you too will be able to enjoy VR and maybe an upgraded PC

 

1st gen HMDs are so cheap right now that bragging about your unlimited income is just silly (unless it indeed made a dent in your budget), anyone can afford one today.
It just that some don't care about it, either due to VR sickness or significant drop in image quality esp. if you have triples or big 4k monitor.
Gen 2, if it ever comes out, might change that.

 

"Spoiled kid?" Hehe, 56 year old working his butt off for his family and favorite hobby here with little-to-no chance of retirement (except the permanent kind) but, either way - these things generally mean making some sacrifices to get the things we really want. Life can be hard and very unfair but, why not make the best of it and find ways to enjoy something on a daily basis (?) If we had unlimited financial options, why not just have the real deal and skip the pretend stuff?

My son has many friends with Supercars / Track-day cars and almost none of them pay any attention to Sim-racing at all. My friend who has a stable of very high-performance cars just laughs at how serious we take Sim-racing but, he has the luxury of choice and much prefers the real deal above the virtual. I still find it hard not to appreciate what I have though, and can take some poke's and jab's from friends and family along the way. Besides, virtual has certain advantages that RL struggles to provide in terms of safety and affordability plus, I get to drive virtual Supercars / Racecars on an - almost, daily basis as well or as abusively as I choose without much consequence so I'm fine with pretending. Which title I use is of far less importance than having the choice to drive or not. Yeah, in that sense, I guess I am spoiled rotten but, it has much to do with the period of time in which we exist.

 

VR tech is not mainstream yet but it will be the same way as 2d screens are now.

https://www.futureofeverything.io/ask-thought-leaders-whats-future-vr/

 

Really hope VR wheel keeps turning and don't come to complete halt.
The article is from 2017, btw, when VR interest was at its peak.
If we don't see 2nd gen HMDs before Christmas, that'd be a pretty solid indication that it's indeed in trouble.
Why Oculus went mobile, is there really a market for that useless gizmo?

 

I wouldn't say that. It's still basically €400 where ever I look here in Ireland, that can be a lot of money to some people, there are big pressures on people these days with rents skyrocketing so even people making a good wage may find it hard to justify dropping €400 on a new piece of technology they've never used before. If there are other hardware costs like new graphics cars the price could be closer to €600. People in countries with less wealthy economies are going to find it a lot of money to spend. €400 can be an entire months wages in some less wealthy parts of the European union and Europe's relatively rich compared to the rest of the world.

For many people real racing just isn't an option, even if I had the money to spend on a track toy I'd have no where to bring it. We only have one track in Ireland and it has to service the needs of the entire country.

 

Yeah a poll done on RD earlier this year shows a vastly higher number of VR users:
https://www.racedepartment.com/threads/what-display-output-do-you-use-for-sim-racing.145880/

 

We are a long way from any road courses where we live so even if I had a track-day worthy car, it would involve a lot of travel and added expense. The only tracks in our area are very short ovals, and most of those are dirt-tracks. Stock-car racing is popular here in Midwestern USA.

It's pretty rare to even see a Sportscar around here, except for the occasional Corvette or Mustang; Pickup-trucks and SUV's tend to rule the roads. Perhaps that makes VR even more attractive; the prospect of feeling as though we're actually sitting in some of these (virtual) cars is a way to experience something that is such a rare opportunity.

 

Sounds somewhat similar to here. Tractors, tractors everywhere. I'm from a farming town. There is a Lamborghini aventador roaming the countryside around here, I think it's someones English relation. I can hear it coming for miles, it really does sound fantastic. The Irish cannon ball run also passed by near me once a year.

The problem with Ireland is it's tiny and there's no free space left, there's no such thing as wilderness, it's all private land.

 

I said: Did you buy VR and cannot play on one screen anymore ? Bad for you spoiled kids

"Spoiled kids" is related to some of you that states you cannot play the game on single-screen anymore..
Of Course VR sounds cool , I personally don't buy yet as I would like to test it and make sure I don't feel sick and @Stains .. believe me .. I don't need a second job.. my salary is quite good as well as PC specs

 

It's not that people with VR think that they're too good for single screen anymore but that some setups are one or the other. I don't have a dedicated PC for VR use, so I need to be able to do other things with my PC, so my monitor isn't mounted to the rig and I have no way of getting it close without constructing something. So I just don't have an easy way to play on a screen and I'm content enough with AC that I'm not going to make changes for another sim, I'll just play AC.