
Oculus Rift Pre-Orders to Open on January 6 - JDDunn9
https://www.oculus.com/en-us/blog/oculus-rift-pre-orders-to-open-on-jan-6/
======
aresant
I am truly surprised at the lack of enthusiasm on this thread.

The Oculus is the FIRST high-fidelity consumer VR experience.

And they've got the horsepower of Facebook's cash-machine as their bankroll.

Zuck gets this to the degree that I suspect he believes Facebook & VR will be
synonymous within a decade (1)

Do I wish that Oculus was owned by some benevolent billionaire trickster like
OASIS in Ready Player One? Sure, but come off it!

This release will mark the starting line of the change in how we interact with
computers, how we capture memories, how we tell stories.

Oculus + 3D audio + input + eventual tactical is going to completely blur the
lines of reality in ways we can't yet imagine.

Already in the DK2 I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.

Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion.

I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate.

. . .

Really though, I have had some shocking experiences in the Oculus, starting
with the DK1 going off the edge of a rollercoaster and feeling my stomach
physically drop.

Yes this is a generation 1 product for early adopters.

Yes it's going to be expensive to buy, it won't be perfect.

But if you're browsing HN because you're a hacker / developer / dreamer you
are crazy to discount how substantial this release is (especially if you
haven't TRIED it yet!).

(1)
[http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/feee4a1e-63aa-11e5-a28b-50226...](http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/feee4a1e-63aa-11e5-a28b-50226830d644.html#axzz3wIPsefAw)

~~~
mkozlows
I've played with a DK2. It was cool. But reasons not to be super-excited are:

1\. Hardware requirements are steep (GTX 970 minimum), so plenty of hardware
-- including plenty of hardware that's good for high-end gaming today -- won't
be good enough for this.

2\. Only Windows support. No compatibility with Linux, SteamOS, or even OSX
means that the techie enthusiasts who'd play with it as a tech toy are going
to be less interested.

3\. But biggest of all: The games aren't there. It's become very clear, both
from playing with the DK2, and listening to presentations by Valve and Oculus
people, that VR games can't just be regular games with VR bolted on. "Skyrim,
but with VR" sounds cool, and makes for a cool five-minute demo, but will just
make you sick and be unsatisfying in the long term.

VR games need to be designed for VR in a really fundamental way. It's not
clear that there are any interesting games that do this, or that there's a lot
of effort going toward making games like this.

If this were a product that were coming out from Nintendo, I'd be confident
that they had a good idea about how to adapt their franchises to take
advantage of VR in a really cool way, and that there'd be at least a handful
of games that made it an absolute must-have. But from Facebook... well,
they're a tech company, not a gaming company, so they're depending on someone
else to make the games that will justify this thing. Maybe that'll work in the
long term, but right now, it doesn't seem like there's any must-have VR game.

Add that all up, and this is a product that won't appeal to most gamers yet,
and won't appeal to a lot of tech geeks due to the Windows focus, so... yeah.

~~~
aresant
1) Yep. But not bad for a first generation product. Already plenty of guides
about building a VR ready computer for <$1000.

2) Only windows. Agreed. But I'm glad they did so they could get one platform
dialed in instead of chasing multiple rabbits. For now.

3) Games - copying part of this - do yourself a favor and try with Elite
Dangerous or Assetto Corsa. And gaming doesn't scratch the service in terms of
application - training, social interaction, SEX, therapy, etc, etc.

~~~
mkozlows
So part of what I'm saying is that 1 & 2 cancel themselves out. The people who
would drop $1500 ($1K computer plus maybe $500 VR headset) on a first-gen
thing are more likely to be the early-adopter types who are less interested in
a Windows-only device.

As for 3: I played Elite for a bit. And then quit when I got motion-sick. I'm
not particularly motion-sensitive, but DK2 got me there pretty quickly.

Maybe the retail one is better in ways that wouldn't make me sick in that
case, but from what Valve people have been saying, the only reliable way to
get rid of the sickness is to remove the disconnect between not-moving and
seeming-to-move, aka make games that involve only your real-world motion.

If that's the case, it implies that what we need are radically different games
than what we have. So I'd either want to see those games, or see some proof
that you can do Elite-style gaming with no motion sickness even when playing
for hours.

~~~
HeXetic
> The people who would drop $1500 ... on a first-gen thing are more likely to
> be the early-adopter types who are less interested in a Windows-only device.

I feel pretty confident in saying that the people who spend big bucks on
computer gaming are mostly not giving two shits about Linux while they do it.
SteamOS and general Linux gaming is pretty decent these days but still... if
you are a hardcore gamer, odds are overwhelming that you are running Windows.

------
ambiate
Here are my thoughts on the situation:

1) First generation devices are usually flops/riddled with bugs, but usually
exploitable if you don't upgrade firmware/etc.

2) I would probably need to buy a 980TI ($600) or Titan X ($1k) to make up for
my i7-2600k's failure. (I want a Titan X for deep convolution neural networks
anyways).

3) Nvidia is on the verge of releasing their Pascal architecture. The Titan X
was just recently released (Mar '15?). While it is a powerhouse, the pascal
base Titan may come with 12-16GB of memory and a 10-20% speed increase.

4) Intel is near release on their broadwell-e platform which should be able to
consume 40 pci-e lanes (like haswell-e). No word yet on if they plan on being
able to use 40 pci-e lanes with skylake.

Summary: In 1 years time, there will be a base Pascal Titan that outperforms
the Maxwell Titan X, a new ~$500 CPU that will be on par with the current
$1000 CPU, and an assortment of VR options available. As much as it pains me,
unless I see a Titan X for $600-800 on craigslist, I'm going to wait this one
out.

~~~
fla
The DK2 works fine on middle-line GPUs. I'm certain this one will too.

Edit: I meant "worked"

~~~
Pxtl
Really? My understanding was that VR required extremely high framerates to
provide a satisfying experience to the user.

~~~
gh02t
Officially recommended graphics hardware is a GTX970, which are a much more
palatable $3-400.

~~~
Pxtl
I've never dropped more than $150US on a video card, and that was before the
Canadian dollar tanked.

I'm thinking I'm going to be waiting a bit before getting into this business.

~~~
gh02t
IMO, for Nvidia the *70's are the sweet spot at about $300. They perform well
enough that they last for a while and aren't obsolete quickly (my main problem
with buying at the lower-middle end), but don't have the absurd diminishing
returns of something like the Titans.

The specs of the Oculus Rift are fairly steep and are basically a middle high
end gaming PC, but they have said that the requirements won't change over the
life of the device so it'll go down. It was about time for a GPU upgrade for
me anyway, so I've been pondering over going for a new GPU + Rift.

------
BinaryIdiot
Probably the better link is to the announcement of the pre-orders itself:
[https://www.oculus.com/en-us/blog/oculus-rift-pre-orders-
to-...](https://www.oculus.com/en-us/blog/oculus-rift-pre-orders-to-open-on-
jan-6/)

I'm confused though; why do a pre-announcement for an announcement about pre-
purchasing a product that's only two days away? They should have simply opened
up pre-orders immediately.

That being said I can't imagine they expect to sell much. It requires such a
beefy PC (of which fewer and fewer are buying them nowadays for ultrabooks and
tablets) and it's going to be expensive plus it won't ship with the touch
controllers.

I think VR will ultimately become HUGE but until I can get one for at most
$200 and use without a beefy PC I'll pass.

~~~
coralreef
Gamers tend to own and upgrade beefy PCs.

~~~
BinaryIdiot
Hmm I'm having trouble finding any type of reliable statistics. When I used to
do lots of PC gaming I was in many gaming groups of which maybe 10% of them
would upgrade their computers to be above mid to high end. At most (all of us
always complained about how terrible our PCs were and how lower our FPS were
almost as if it were a badge of honor). But this is anecdotal so I have no
ground to really speak on. Having said that it's hard for me to swallow that
PC gamers "tend" to "own and upgrade beefy PCs".

Any sources?

Edit: interesting that when asking for source regarding the parent's claim I
get multiple downvotes. I don't really understand why.

~~~
yathern
Here is a good source - unfortunately down at the moment for me:

[http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey](http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey)

~~~
BinaryIdiot
Thanks I'll check it out when it comes back online later. It's been a while
since I looked at the steam survey; I wonder how indicative it is compared
with the PC gaming industry as a whole. I mean they practically have a
monopoly so I would imagine it's at least good statistically but I don't know
how many go through the survey (I'm assuming it's still opt-in like it was
when I last used it which could skew the numbers).

~~~
lfowles
It pops up every few months to a year for me when I first open Steam, so not
necessarily opt-in (but very easy to opt-out). About the only thing you have
to fill out as well is your connection speed, so it's pretty painless.

------
TranquilMarmot
Now the real question- go with Facebook and buy an Oculus Rift or go with
Valve/HTC and buy a Vive?

The Vive has more features (like head tracking) but maybe it will be more
expensive? There's been nothing but silence in terms of pricing of either of
them... I do have a hard time justifying $500+ for a screen I'll strap to my
head that will probably be obsolete in a year or two.

I will say though, I recently bought a Steam Link and a Steam Controller and I
am pretty impressed with the quality of Valve's hardware.

~~~
baby
I tried both and the HTC Vive was just years ahead. I haven't tried the new
oculus touch but the simple fact that they won't ship it included tells me
it's nowhere near HTC Vive.

~~~
haydenlee
I've tried both (and own a Vive) and the Touch definitely has better
ergonomics and is more analogous to having your hand in the world whereas the
Vive 'wands' feel like you are holding a stick. It's not a clear cut decision.
Personally I prefer Touch.

~~~
purplelobster
The Vive controllers are literally a steam controller cut in half, i.e.
prototype material. I think they already said that the released controllers
would be updated.

------
mgo
I just get the feeling VR technology simply will not work because the
resolution isn't high enough, and even the most top-end monster PCs cannot
handle standard resolution VR, let alone 4K or even 8K in the future.

Graphics cards really need a huge performance jump to make VR work, and given
both Nvidia and AMD seem to be happy releasing a new set each year with only
modest 20-30% performance gains then what does this mean for VR?

~~~
Karunamon
Eh. VR "worked" quite well enough for presence on the now-ancient Rift devkit
2. And my machine is hardly top of the line. A many gens old Intel proc with
modest RAM and a GTX970.

Worst case? It means that details are scaled back in the name of framerate.
Presence still works in a world that doesn't seem perfectly lifelike, so as
long as the player is in another world, that's the single most important
thing.

Less AA, less texture resolution. We can dial that back up as the tech gets
better.

VR is the new Crysis when it comes to stress testing your hardware :)

~~~
corysama
Exactly. Half Life 2 worked when hardware was 10x slower than today. Lots of
3D games worked even before that. They just didn't look like Star Wars
Battlefront.

~~~
ethbro
Unreal Engine 1 is still my benchmark for doing impressive things on pretty
much any level of hardware at the time.

------
akmiller
Not that you can necessarily pinpoint a specific date for release when dealing
with hardware but I have to believe, with no hard evidence, that releasing new
products right after Christmas and just before tax time has to be one of the
worst times to release...unless you intentionally want demand to be initially
low.

~~~
berberous
I imagine the pent up demand for a consumer launch may exceed their initial
manufacturing capacity.

------
Sir_Cmpwn
Did they ever decide to care about Linux again? I returned my devkit because
they said they didn't care about Linux a couple of weeks after I got mine. I
won't send them more money unless they're going to support Linux.

~~~
Tmmrn
You could... return it? I thought they were very clear it wasn't refundable
and there were some discussions in the forums about it with some negative
quotes from the customer support...

> I won't send them more money unless they're going to support Linux.

Careful, they already said they support linux with the dk2 and we know how
that went. Don't rely on what they say they "are going to do". Only buy it
when they demonstrate complete and fully working linux support, not earlier.

~~~
Sir_Cmpwn
>You could... return it? I thought they were very clear it wasn't refundable
and there were some discussions in the forums about it with some negative
quotes from the customer support...

You're right, but I spoke with support and made my case and since it had been
such a short time since I bought it, they went ahead and did the refund.

>Careful, they already said they support linux with the dk2 and we know how
that went. Don't rely on what they say they "are going to do". Only buy it
when they demonstrate complete and fully working linux support, not earlier.

Sorry about my wording. I'm not going to buy it until there is actual support
that I can actually use at the moment I open the box.

------
aculver
I'm surprised no one on here has mentioned Minecraft yet.

One game that I was never able to get into before Oculus Rift was Minecraft.
My kids have been begging me to play with them, but I really struggled to
remain interested in the game. I could see why _they_ loved it, but I didn't
get into myself.

It bugged me that I was missing this opportunity to connect with my kids,
especially with something computer-y, so over the holiday I spent a little
time getting the Minecrift mod working.

Wow!

I now totally get it, and it seems to me that Minecraft will be at least one
huge driver for the adoption of VR hardware amongst folks who are able to use
it. (Recommended 13+.)

The low-resolution polygons in Minecraft really accentuate the 3D effect. When
you're going up hills or looking at trees, the depth effect is crazily
pronounced and amazing.

The basic graphics in Minecraft also have the benefit of rendering quite
nicely even on incredibly limited hardware. For example, I spent hours playing
on my 12" Retina MacBook, which I believe is the weakest hardware Apple ships.
(Maybe it benefits from a GPU that powers a Retina display? I don't know.)

Getting attacked by creepers and zombies in the first-person was an insane
experience. My heart rate was actually going up as I attempted to escape and
ultimately failed.

And I was _there_. I grew personally attached to the cave I mined for myself
where I hid to protect myself throughout the night, and felt a little sad when
I accidentally let water flood in and destroy it. I was _in_ that cave. Very
cool.

I would frequently look down at my hands to remind myself of what weapon or
tool I was holding and go through my hot keys until I saw the tool I wanted to
use.

I'd spend a good deal of time just watching that big pixelated sun set over a
landscape, and if I found a safe place, I'd sit around and watch the stars
move through the night sky as the earth rotated. (Mostly I think this is when
I became the most aware of the "screen door" effect.)

Anyway, if you've got DK2 hardware, I highly recommend trying it out with
Minecraft if you haven't already. Microsoft announced they're planning
official Oculus Rift support for Minecraft in the first half of next year, and
judging from the way my son talks to his friends about it ("he's actually _in_
Minecraft,") I think Minecraft will be a huge driver of sales of Oculus Rift.

------
cs0
Why do they have to be so secretive of their pricing?! Why can't I see the
price now so I can consider if it's worth it or not?

~~~
potatolicious
Presumably because they want to be able to justify the pricing by telling you
all about the new stuff they put into the thing, and they want to time details
of the product with a big unveiling and marketing push.

Just announcing the price without details of what you're getting for it is
just going to make a bunch of forums and subreddits very angry in the way only
gaming communities can get really angry.

~~~
ethbro
If they're shipping by Q1, then they know exactly what the details / specs
are.

If they haven't released the price, it's more likely because FB wants to throw
some serious money behind the marketing push. Which either means they were
going to anyway, or the price is going to shock people.

~~~
potatolicious
Sure, they definitely know what the details and specs are, but they also want
to make a big deal out of said details/specs, and dropping it silently on a
web page isn't anyone's idea of a big launch.

It's likely that there are substantial differences between the product and the
DK2, or even what's been discussed in previous interviews/previews, so it
makes sense to not talk too much about the product until they're in a position
to present it properly (e.g., a big keynote followed by journalist demos).

And yeah, it's going to be expensive - the fact that they've said as much in
previous interviews means they've already been trying to soften the ground for
the revelation. It's almost certainly going to be more expensive than the
DK1/DK2.

------
seanwilson
I don't understand why there isn't more emphasis on non-realistic graphics for
VR to keep the specs down. If you try to make a VR game that looks as good as
current high-end games, it's always going to require massive horsepower
because it must run at 60+ FPS at a high resolution so everyone but hardcore
gamers are going to be left out.

Mobile gaming became hugely popular without high-end graphics because of the
easy of use, portability and touch input controls. I would have thought it
would make more sense for VR games to focus on experiences you can only have
with VR games (e.g. highly immersive, having sense of scale, use of hand
input) and play to its strengths rather than limit its audience with high-end
graphics.

I'm very excited about VR but having to buy a Rift and a high-end Windows
gaming PC is asking a lot to get involved.

~~~
Arelius
There is a lot of emphasis on non-realistic graphics. But the consensus is
that it must run at 90FPS+ with two views so that bumps the specs back up
again. Especially considering that most contemporary game engines aren't build
with those sort of latencies in mind.

~~~
mastax
> There is a lot of emphasis on non-realistic graphics

Yes, I've seen this a lot on mobile especially and also with things like "Job
Simulator". What I'm confused about is everyone (especially on /r/oculus)
being very adamant about needing a GTX 970+ for VR.

My ~$200 GTX 760 can consistently run Team Fortress 2 at upwards of 200 frames
per second, and TF2 looks fine to me.

I'm sure many people will appreciate having games for VR that take advantage
of their fancy hardware, but why scare people away with such high
requirements? Can't the industry tighten its belt a little for the first round
and live with the fact that VR games won't look quite as good as their 2D
counterparts? Surely even a $700 gaming PC would deliver a better experience
than GearVR, which is already quite good.

------
baby
Ah, between this and HTC Vive... After testing both the HTC Vive was just
years better than the Oculus, but I haven't tried the new Oculus iteration
with touch... So hard to choose.

Anyone want to discuss setups for both? I need to buy a new machine for that.

~~~
yathern
Are you sure you tested the Oculus CV1? There's been many hardware iterations
from Oculus and the latest one that people have been sampling has gotten very
good reviews, some better than the Vive.

I'm not saying that I know for a fact that one is better than the other, but
I'm surprised that you think one is 'years better'.

~~~
baby
I have actually never read a review placing the Oculus above the HTC, I
haven't read reviews in a while though. Around 6 months ago the consensus was
that HTC Vive was way ahead IIRC.

------
Blackthorn
As a flight sim enthusiast, I am super pumped about this. Though a shame the
hands-controller was delayed so I'll need to buy a third-party one (leap
motion).

~~~
milkmanjr
Flight sim in the rift is what I spend the majority of my free time doing.

Not sure what type of flight sim you are into, but using a proper yoke,
throttle, and rudder pedals makes the experience much more immersive.

~~~
Blackthorn
I use FSX and X-Plane. I already have a yoke/throttle/rudder pedals. I agree,
they vastly improve the experience more than anything else.

I currently use a TrackIR with two monitors, but truth be told it's a bit
janky and I find it very difficult to visually tell angles (for example:
what's the angle of my plane to the runway? I could use the heading indicator
for that purpose but I don't want to develop bad habits for real-life
flights).

The hands thing would let me flip switches in-cockpit, which is nice. No more
mouse!

------
xiaoma
The thing that worries me about this is that I don't see anything mentioned
about different sizes. Hats aren't all one size. Glasses aren't all one size.
I have an unfortunately large skull and "one size fits all" hats never fit me.

Does this mean that there won't be an Oculus for me?

~~~
mkozlows
It uses an elastic strap around your head, and flexible rubber surrounds for
the eyepiece. It should fit just about any head.

------
trezm
So... when does it ship?

~~~
Greenisus
and what will it cost?

~~~
dimlyaware
It looks like it hasn't been announced yet:

[ While Facebook and Oculus VR aren't quite ready to reveal a price of the
Rift, Luckey suggested that it'll cost more than the $350 developer's kit.

"You know, I'm going to be perfectly honest with you," Luckey said in an
interview back in September. "We're roughly in that ballpark... but it's going
to cost more than that. And the reason for that is that we've added a lot of
technology to this thing beyond what existed in the DK1 and DK2 days."

While $350 may be too low, $1,000 seems to be too high. Elaborating on the
Rift's pricing on Twitter recently, Luckey stated that Oculus VR has the
backing of Facebook and doesn't need an immediate hardware profit.

"A company that has to survive on immediate hardware profit would have to hit
with a much higher price - think $1000+. Not greed, reality," he tweeted. "1st
gen VR users are being heavily subsidized by major players who want VR
business to grow, though few seem to understand that." ]

Source of Above: [http://www.techtimes.com/articles/120994/20160103/oculus-
rif...](http://www.techtimes.com/articles/120994/20160103/oculus-rift-
features-pricing-release-date-and-everything-else-you-need-to-know.htm)

------
glynjackson
I'm more looking forward to seeing the Sony VR. It's rumoured to be around the
$250-$350 price mark. Sony have a history of getting traction despite not
having the best spec/product, for example, remember HD DVD vs Blu Ray?

~~~
bonesinger
I also think the Sony VR specs are pretty high. They want people to buy a PS4
and play games on their VR system.

~~~
seanwilson
The big advantage Sony has is they know all VR games will work well by design
as all PS4s have the same spec.

------
melted
Now watch this face plant in the market. It's a niche product with
horrifically overinflated expectations, steep pricing, and no application
ecosystem or clear, killer-app use case. Good luck folks, you're gonna need
it.

~~~
swalsh
I mean, i'm not going to buy it... but only because I think the vive offers a
better experience. I think VR in general is pretty promising, and a bit more
than "niche"

~~~
melted
What's the use case to justify the massive cash outlay these things require? I
don't see it.

~~~
soared
Use case? Video games,obviously. This is early-early adopter tech. Chill out
with your absurdly premature predictions.

~~~
melted
We're talking $1500 for the headset and GPU able to support the headset. Plus
a pretty beefy workstation to feed that GPU. Plus the games don't actually
exist yet, and they face a massive chicken-and-egg problem. No one but the
most dedicated early adopters will buy this until the price comes down like
3x.

------
akmiller
Anyone know if the rift would work on the newest high end model iMacs with the
AMD M390? Obviously still have to run it via Windows I assume but just
wondering if it would even work on them.

~~~
x1024
Your GPU has an "M" in it. I don't have hard evidence, but my experience says
it won't work.

------
irln
Making predictions about the adoption of technology is always perilous.
However, after using Google's cardboard camera to take a few pictures on
vacation and reviewing those pictures afterward I'm a believer. There's
something about the immersive nature of those images that provide a very
emotional contextual experience. If one is able to experience this with albeit
relatively crude technology when compared to offerings like Oculus, I think
these products could be very impactful.

~~~
erikpukinskis
Wait until the light field cameras (like the Lytro Immerge) come out. It's
going to blow peoples' minds.

------
lsiunsuex
Can anyone speak to using the Rift as an extended desktop? I've seen some
mention of using it as an extended monitor in both Windows and OS X - has
anyone with development devices used it with head tracking and had an almost
infinite display?

How cool would it be to ditch multiple monitors and spread out over a 360
sphere code windows / browsers / documentation / etc... ? Use the head
tracking to navigate the desktop world and still use the keyboard / mouse to
interact.

~~~
jc4p
For what it's worth as of SDK 0.6.0 of the Oculus you can no longer use it as
an extended display. Prior to 0.6.0 you could run the Oculus in either
"Extended" mode which just made it show up as an extra monitor, or in "Direct"
mode where apps directly displayed their contents on the Oculus (without you
having to move the window, make it full screen, etc).

What you're talking about however can easily be done with [Virtual
Desktop]([http://www.vrdesktop.net/](http://www.vrdesktop.net/)) -- I've used
it a few times while developing, it mostly works. It's definitely a nice
experience to have your IDE infront of you, documentation a head tilt to the
right, and Google a head tilt to the left, but the resolution was too low for
me to be comfortable reading text for a long time on the DK2.

------
strictnein
Better link?

[https://www.oculus.com/en-us/blog/oculus-rift-pre-orders-
to-...](https://www.oculus.com/en-us/blog/oculus-rift-pre-orders-to-open-on-
jan-6/)

Also, no mention of the promised Xbox One controller among the bundled items.
Wonder if they'll just be sending a coupon or something in the box.

~~~
erikpukinskis
It's in the box. Palmer has said over and over people can just sell it if they
don't want it.

------
moron4hire
VR is not comparable to 3D TV because it's not TV. It's fundamentally an
interactive medium over which the user has complete narrative control, yet one
that doesn't feel like you're _interacting_ with something, so much as wearing
a piece of clothing. 3D TV is _burdensome_ for _very little benefit_. VR is
_freeing_ for significantly greater benefit.

If you haven't tried it, you don't understand the difference between head
tracking and moving a mouse around in an FPS game. They are not just different
ways to move a pointer around. They are fundamentally different. They are so
fundamentally different that it's actually difficult to combine the two
concepts.

VR is not comparable to the Wii or the Xbox 360 with the Kinect (which were
_massively_ successful products, so I don't know what the point of comparing
them is), because there is zero disconnect between motion and reaction. You
aren't looking at a mirror version of yourself moving around. You're just
moving around.

If you haven't tried it, you don't understand the difference between waving
your hand around at the Kinect, trying to line up hits with no depth
perception, and using VR with even a relatively low-res positional tracker
like the Leap Motion.

If you haven't tried it, you just don't know what you're talking about. You
have nothing in your life from which to draw a conclusion. That includes
anyone talking about the systems from the 1990s. I can, today, in a weekend,
create a full VR experience that would blow Dactyl Nightmare out of the water,
and give it to you for a handful of dollars. The order of magnitude difference
in realism and price is staggering. It's the between a real car and one of
those RC cars that only turns when you put it in reverse, and then only in one
direction. Except the real car is the one that costs $50, and the RC car was
$20k.

VR is going to fulfill the promise of teleconferencing. If VR was a "flop" in
the 90s, then teleconferencing definitely was, too. Talking to people face-to-
face in VR is night-and-day better than using Skype or FaceTime. There is
barely any comparison to be made. You forget you're using technology when
having a f2f with a person in VR. And this isn't a prediction. This is
available _today_.

The product development lifecycle is going to speed up, as VR is going to give
us a new, virtualized testing cycle that isn't bottle-necked by physical
prototypes just to check look-and-feel.

Architects are going to make better pitches. Universities and hospitals are
going to sell more buildings and research wings to big-ticket donors. Other
universities will do away with their physical presence entirely. Doctors will
be able to share life-saving techniques and train other doctors across the
world in the fine-motor skill to perform it. Museums are going to be able to
record exhibits in full detail, into perpetuity, and provide patrons
unprecedented access to artifacts that would otherwise be too sensitive to put
on display in public, relatively uncontrolled environments. Psychiatrists are
going to be able to treat more patients. Data scientists are going to be able
to recall and organize more information.

All of these things are doable on a smartphone in a cardboard box, say nothing
about the rapidly developing market of purpose-built devices. Have you not
been paying attention? Technological advancement has only been accelerating.
It's not going to be "many years" before these devices are any good. It's
going to be two. It's going to be less time than it took the iPhone to get any
good. Remember that original iPhone? That no-app-store-having, no-3G-having,
no-GPS-having, no-speech-recognition-having iPhone? That glorified iPod with a
relatively crappy phone crammed in it?

To quote Tom Hardy's character Eames, speaking to Joseph Gordon Levitt's
character Arthur in the Christopher Nolan film INCEPTION: "You mustn't be
afraid to dream a little bigger, darling."

~~~
erikpukinskis
> VR is going to fulfill the promise of teleconferencing.

This is perhaps the most important aspect of VR to me. Presence with people
who aren't present will be VR's killer app. Time and time again we see that
messaging is the biggest use of most platforms. Messaging in VR will just be
turning your head and talking to someone.

I am really interested to see whether meatspace office buildings will be able
to compete with shared virtual workspaces.

Turning your head or walking across the room to ask someone a question was
always the key differentiator for physical offices. VR takes that away. Maybe
there is some killer feature left for offices, but I kind of think this might
be the moment where the disruptive technology (telecom) overtakes the
incumbent (meatspace).

~~~
moron4hire
I'm actively hoping meatspace office buildings become a quaint, too-expensive-
to-compete contrivance. With AR and virtual work spaces, I think it'll be
possible to make people more productive than they would be without VR. If that
happens, it will be economic suicide to NOT use VR. The savings in green-house
gasses, the extra time people will have, the reduction in cost of living. We'd
finally have a truly global economy.

------
peter303
Having tried both the Oculus and Glass, I'd say the Oculus is more exciting.
The Glass had about the least capacity a user could tolerate - slow with few
pixels. The Oculus is about the most you cram into a wearable, even if you
have to pay a lot for it.

------
unklefolk
A pre-pre order holding page. Before this webpage I guess we were in a pre-
pre-pre order state?

------
outericky
Is there anywhere to see a demo? Or are we just preordering?

~~~
dshankar
Major trade shows in the coming months are your best bet. I assume you're in
SF and the next best SF event to demo would be GDC in March (if you can wait
that long)

------
polskibus
I wonder if the Ephiphany day was chosen on purpose. Just kidding, can't wait!

------
meeper16
All hail the Lawnmower Man! This is going to be the biggest flop in the
history of history due to being sent back to the 90's
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCxFGxqLsHE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCxFGxqLsHE)

Go Mondo2000!

