
Oculus Rift Review: VR’s Rising Star Isn’t Ready for the Mainstream - minimaxir
http://www.wsj.com/articles/oculus-rift-review-vrs-rising-star-isnt-ready-for-the-mainstream-1459173888
======
Sir_Substance
>There’s already another VR rig that doesn’t have a tether—and it costs a
fraction of the Rift. Samsung’s $100 Gear VR, made in partnership with Oculus,
is powered by a smartphone that you physically insert in front of two lenses.
The extra costs of the Rift (monetary and otherwise) would be justified if its
image quality were dramatically better than the Gear’s, but it isn’t.

I already got the sense that the author really hadn't done much research
before writing the piece, but that statement is very telling. The key benefits
of a rift over a gear vr are in it's motion capture, the processing power made
available to it by the attached computer and not being time restricted by
limited battery life, and I would expect a critic to know that.

As it stands I respect the dudes view, and it'll be one shared by a lot of
non-gamers, but this is basically a lets-play, not a critical review.

~~~
MBCook
I've been following VR for the last year or so. There is no question that the
Rift has better specs and can do better graphics than the Gear.

But I've read more than a few people in the VR space (game journalists,
developers) say that there is something special about the Gear _because_ there
is no cable. There's nothing you have to keep conscious of so you don't trip
over it or feel it on your back breaking immersion.

The Gear VR could be enhanced with better tracking, and as new phones come out
it will get better processing power. I think Fowler is right.

VR is very new. Let's say your a consumer who wants to play with it. What's a
better investment? $2200 in a PC and a Rift, or $100 that clips on your phone
(assuming you're on Samsung)?

If you just want to try it for now, play around a bit? The Gear is _very_
compelling.

(I'd love one, but I use an iPhone. I've got a PS VR on order though.)

~~~
Sir_Substance
>$2200 in a PC and a Rift, or $100 that clips on your phone (assuming you're
on Samsung)?

Your figures are a little off. A rift is (all following figures in USD) $599,
and a computer that will support it is generally quoted at $950, making it's
package price $1550. You can buy bundles that include a Rift and an Oculus
ready PC for $1499[1].

The gear VR only works with very recent phones, and only works on all games
without heat problems on the S7. S7's are generally quoted at $700, making the
package price $800.

Rough figures, I know, but yours are well out of whack.

[1] [http://www.techtimes.com/articles/134240/20160217/oculus-
rea...](http://www.techtimes.com/articles/134240/20160217/oculus-ready-pcs-
and-rift-bundles-now-available-for-preorder-at-amazon-best-buy-and-microsoft-
store.htm)

~~~
MBCook
I was under the impression you needed a $1500 PC. So I'll give you that.

I'm assuming you're not buying the phone but that you already have one. People
still get them with subsidies too.

The point is that for someone who wants to dip their toes and had a recent
Samsung phone the Gear is DRASTICALLY cheaper. If you have a PS4 (or even if
you don't) then the PS VR is cheaper too.

For people who aren't already committed to VR, I think Fowler is right that
the Rift is way too much at this point.

Give it time.

~~~
wlesieutre
> The point is that for someone who wants to dip their toes and had a recent
> Samsung phone the Gear is DRASTICALLY cheaper. If you have a PS4 (or even if
> you don't) then the PS VR is cheaper too.

And on the other end of that, I have a GTX 970 but my phone is from Sony and I
don't own a console. If I want to get into VR, the Rift is my cheapest option.

Different target markets - the Gear is aimed at the general public with
Samsung phones, the Rift is aimed at PC gamers with gaming PCs. Sure, some
people will buy a slightly better rig or upgrade sooner than they would have
otherwise, but fundamentally it's targeting people who are going to own a
gaming computer anyway.

I'd guess that the people buying a Rift + PC bundle as their first PC gaming
setup will be doing it after trying one on in person to evaluate it. It'll
happen, but it'll be a slower push driven by word of mouth.

~~~
MBCook
> the Gear is aimed at the general public with Samsung phones, the Rift is
> aimed at PC gamers with gaming PCs

And _the article_ is aimed at the _general public_ , not gamers. That's why
there is nothing wrong with Fowler's analysis.

I'm not arguing that the Gear is going to give the best experience of all
solutions, I was defending Fowler's point.

~~~
wlesieutre
> And the article is aimed at the general public, not gamers. That's why there
> is nothing wrong with Fowler's analysis.

I think we agree, but it feels like he's writing an article proclaiming "Tesla
Roadster Isn’t Ready for the Mainstream" just because Elon Musk said that
electric cars are going to be a transformational technology.

If the big takeaway of the article is "Bleeding edge product that isn't
intended for the general public isn't ready for the general public" then I'm
right on board with him.

------
therobot24
The review read like he was expecting it to be the iphone version of VR.
Complaints about using an expensive computer, the cord, having to use muscle
memory, etc. come off like the type of person who wouldn't be interested in
the Oculus in the first place. While I agree that it looks clunky, really it's
the performance that most would-be buyers are interested in.

~~~
vernie
The operative word here is "mainstream"

~~~
Retric
Is ~50 million people "mainstream"? Considering he complained about
downloading drivers this must be very easy to setup.

Gaming PC's used to be ~2,000$, this is 600 + 950PC = 1550$.
[https://www.oculus.com/en-us/oculus-ready-pcs/](https://www.oculus.com/en-
us/oculus-ready-pcs/) Which is not free but hardly going to break most people.
Don't forget this is just a mid-range gaming PC which many people are going to
get anyway which drops this down to the cost of a high end cellphone.

PS: IMO, WoW was mainstream as a PC only MMO with a few million subscribers in
the US.

~~~
minimaxir
World of Warcraft went mainstream _because_ it didn't require a gaming PC to
play in 2004.

~~~
Retric
There are more than 10x as many active Steam accounts (125m) vs active WoW
accounts at it's peak (12m) in 2010.

Sure, a mid to low end PC could play WoW in 2004, but it only broke 2.5
million subscribers in late 2005. [http://cdn2.ubergizmo.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/10/wow-sub...](http://cdn2.ubergizmo.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/10/wow-subscribe-640x215.jpg) And 10m in 2008.

Give it 4 years and a GTX 970 will be a very low end graphics card.

~~~
minimaxir
Comparing the number of Steam accounts to WoW accounts is comparing apples to
oranges. (And also makes an implicit assumption that everyone who has a Steam
account has a gaming PC, which is not a good assumption.)

In 2004, Steam had no noteworthy buzz and its only purpose was Half-Life 2
DRM.

~~~
Retric
Steam survey actually provides good hardware numbers.

The important thing is with the number of Steam Users each 1% is more than 1
million people. Thus < 50% can still be a lot of people. (4.39% own a 970 GTX
GPU, 0.92% own a 980 GTX GPU, 0.72% own a GTX 980 Ti ~= 7.5 million people who
don't need to upgrade graphics card, now add ATI and SLI.)

PS: Active Steam account = bought something from steam AND logged on in the
last 2 weeks. Which IMO is a much higher hurdle than most website tracking.
And clearly not all gaming PC's are on Steam.

~~~
duaneb
Steam often logs in on boot. I don't see this as a very interesting metric and
certainly not related to the popularity of the first generation of a VR
device.

~~~
Retric
How else are you going to estimate the number of PC's used for games that
don't need to upgrade? Or even the number of PC gamers?

------
keypusher
It's strange to have a non-gamer do the review for this, as he seems to know
very little about the field, or computer gaming. I guess they are aiming for a
mainstream opinion, but Occulus is not a mainstream device. It's a high-end
gaming peripheral. For instance that the author mentions incredulously
multiple times that his high-end PC requires two power cables, which I just
don't understand. I found his colleague's review (which is referenced in the
article, also wsj) much more informative. His take was that it's a pretty cool
piece of technology, but needs more games.

[http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2016/03/28/oculus-rift-is-
built-...](http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2016/03/28/oculus-rift-is-built-for-
gamers-but-needs-better-games/)

~~~
atonse
Is that how the Oculus team has marketed it? That it's a peripheral only for
hardcore gamers, and not at all mainstream? I doubt it.

~~~
Animats
Read what Zuckerberg had to say when Facebook bought Oculus.[1]: "This is
really a new communication platform. By feeling truly present, you can share
unbounded spaces and experiences with the people in your life. Imagine sharing
not just moments with your friends online, but entire experiences and
adventures." He's talking about VR as a social medium, like Facebook.

Sort of like Second Life. Second Life has supported the Oculus Rift since late
2014. Nobody cares.[2]

I can see using one for FPS games, but beyond that, it's not that compelling.
There's still no killer VR app.

[1]
[https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10101319050523971](https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10101319050523971)
[2] [http://www.roadtovr.com/second-life-now-official-oculus-
rift...](http://www.roadtovr.com/second-life-now-official-oculus-rift-
dk2-support/)

------
6stringmerc
Coming from a background with thousands of hours of hardcore multiplayer
gaming, I'm very dis-interested in VR as a gaming platform, most specifically
Oculus due to cost. The competitive field sounds like it needs some time to
work through which device(s) get the best market traction (flashbacks to HD-
DVD vs. Blu-Ray). I think the author of the article knows his audience pretty
well and meets the review expectations as stated - what is the 'mainstream'
use case?

I think one of the most relevant parallells - for now, at this stage of
development - is with a projetor. Relatively high cost of entry, takes effort
and space for setup, and for basic day-to-day entertainment, kind of overkill.
Sure it's great from time to time to take a projector and game rig outside and
play Forza on a two-car garage door with a screen so big landing planes can
probably see it, no doubt. It's actually nice to have one when other people
are over, so it's a more engaging device, unlike putting on a headset.

Honestly I think about the time VR will be considered 'mainstream' is when the
more customary (and accessible) entertainment forms start generating in-demand
content. Think major motion picture studios, TV networks, and concert-type
footage (Rolling Stones in Cuba probably in development as I type this). Or,
as one more comparison, once the VR platform is as dynamic and simple as the
iPhone environment (games, communication, media) then more people will adopt
in turn and the market will diversify in beneficial ways (serious vs. casual
gamers, etc).

I'm really excited to see what the 'traditional' creative platforms like music
and storytelling are going to do in the environment over time.

------
Xero
"Another big-picture VR problem: It’s boring to be around people who are using
it."

This sentence is pretty emblematic of the product the author of this article
was expecting vs the Rift that Oculus pitched in their kickstarter video.

~~~
Pfhreak
Not to mention that mirroring the VR experience to a TV or monitor is
absolutely delightful to watch. I've had people come over to play Alien
Isolation, Dreadhalls, or Volo Airsport, and watching them play was a huge
delight for everyone. The responses you get from someone who is trapped in a
room with an alien are much more visceral.

~~~
astrodust
You may as well lock people in an isolation pod. This is the problem, isn't
it?

~~~
Pfhreak
They aren't isolated, though. If you know you've got an audience only a foot
or two away, you do behave differently.

In my experience, people often run their mouths constantly -- "Oh god, what's
that, what's over there, is that the alien?" And there's feedback from the
audience, "Oh shit, watch out!"

Not to mention the occasional breath on someone's neck or tap on the shoulder.

When the experience is over, you pull the headset up -- an action not too far
removed from looking away from a monitor -- and immediately start sharing.
"Man, in that room with the shadows, I was watching the alien for a good 20
seconds before any of you saw it!"

------
lisper
Let me see if I have this straight: the advantage of the Rift over the Gear VR
is that the Rift lets you move around and the Gear doesn't. But the Rift has a
(fairly short) cable, and the Gear doesn't. Is that right? Because the problem
seems so obvious that I almost feel a little foolish pointing it out: cables
and movement don't play well together, particularly when, by design, you can't
see the cable.

~~~
83457
The rift has cameras that track your movement. That is the main difference
that you are looking for. I've used the rift dk1 with extension cables and can
actually move around quite freely, though obviously not as much as a wireless
setup. With gearvr you can move around but the headset/game doesn't actually
know you are moving around as there is no external tracker or reference point
like with the rift.

------
tryitnow
Was anyone expecting it to be really ready for mainstream use?

~~~
kzhahou
Absolutely!! I mean, we can quibble over the exact meaning, but the oculus
team took so long precisely in order to have a wide-adoption product instead
of a tech demo, which was available over a year ago.

The Big Question we all have right now is precisely this: will VR enter
mainstream or will it be a gimmick? Oculus is supposed to be leading that
charge. If they can't break into some huge number of homes, then the VR
ecosystem will die before it gets started. Goodbye JauntVR, etc.

------
VeejayRampay
I always think about the people developing such groundbreaking technology,
sweating for years to craft something revolutionary, putting everything you
got into a product, just to get some guy from the Wall Street Journal declare
that it's not ready for mainstream. A guy that knows nothing of the
challenges, the hurdles and quite frankly, nothing of the actual success the
produt will actually have.

But just because Wall Street Journal, that person is somewhat a "voice that
matters" even though he's just some random columnist, with no experience in
the domain and nothing to back it up but his personal opinion and factoids.
How annoying that must be.

~~~
weego
This is a major logical fallacy I've faced in "engineering". Technical
challenges and effort are irrelevant to the consumer: their contract is the
exchange of disposable income for something that they get pleasure / function
out of in a way that is measurable against the investment. If you've spent
years and invested everything in something that sucks, then it sucks until
someone evolves it into something that doesn't. That is why first to market is
not always the golden ticket.

------
spriggan3
VR itself isn't ready for mainstream period. The problem isn't Oculus Rift but
the tech itself. Who can really spend an hour with a VR headset on ? very few
people.

~~~
tluyben2
Oculus is meant for the more non causal gamer; I know quite a few of those and
when they are playing they might as well have a VR set on. A friend of mine,
when she is playing (and she plays for 3-4 hours per day) seems dead from a
distance: when you come closer you see only her eyes and fingers move slightly
while on the screen she is walking through large worlds wielding spells and
weapons. Very few in % might be right but that is a lot of sales for the
solutions that work for these people. I have a few of them (oculus backer, few
simple ones that can be uses with a mobile phone) and I see uses as I do enjoy
the experience and I do see the opportunity to, when the hardware allows, have
enormous virtual screens when focusing on code or other work. My biggest issue
for now is that all off them start to physically hurt when the weight of the
device pushes the plastic into the cushioning in one location on my face after
about 30 minutes.

------
todd8
There are quite a few comments on price here. I will wait for more games or at
least a compelling game or app before buying one. I'm sure I will though.

Consider the price of the HP LaserJet III. It came out around 1990, and I
remember a conversation with a salesperson that said that the price had
already come down so much since the HP LaserJet I that it probably wouldn't
ever get much cheaper. It was a complex machine, motors, belts, gears, laser,
etc., and in today's dollars it cost about $4400. High quality printers today
are everywhere and can cost under $100. It's interesting to consider where VR
will be in a decade or two.

It seems like an important development; one I've been waiting for since 1977.
I was in a graduate-school computer graphics course and I described an idea
that I had for a helmet that would capture motion and position of one's head
and through two small CRTs present a rendered 3D virtual view. The rest of the
class (and the professor) seemed skeptical, but I've always remembered that
feeling about VR like there was an idea that was eventually coming.

------
nice_byte
I got a chance to try out both Oculus and Vive at GDC this year. Oculus' image
quality was exactly the way the author described - like looking through a
screen door. Vive seemed to be much better (and its controllers had mind-
blowing force feedback, which added some realism).

Overall, though, I have two major concerns about VR.

The first is limited range of movement. All VR experiences seem to require the
player to either be seated or move in a confined space. But think of all the
virtual miles you've walked in Fallout or GTA - it's not going to be possible
with VR. I mean, sure, you could use a controller, but it's a solution similar
to putting fake buttons on a touchscreen.

The second is that I'm afraid that this is as good as VR is ever going to get
because of hardware limitations. People sometimes compare the current state of
VR to the early days of gaming consoles, implying that it's going to get much
better. But the NES and PS4 are separated by 30 years of moore's law, which is
predicted to end in 2025 (only 9 years away). The pace at which hardware is
getting better/faster is slowing down.

~~~
ipsum2
With all due respect, all of these are known problems, with known solutions.

Problem 1: Check out the Virtuix Omni, as well as software-only solutions.

Problem 2: See foveated rendering.

------
intrasight
The general theme of discussion here ("Gaming") completely validates the
author's statement that it isn't ready for the "Mainstream"

------
hartator
I am bit jealous that this journalist get the ocolus in advance. Specially
when he doesn't seem to care that much about it.

~~~
drzaiusapelord
Many have had it in advance, its just the review embargo was lifted today, so
we're finally seeing some third-party reviews.

------
justifier
my main complaint with the rift is often overlooked, (edit: this is simply
untrue, it appears since i walked away from the stereoscopic vr world the
issue of ipd has certainly been addressed and efforts have been made to
assuage the problem)

and unfortunately i think will only start to be addressed when the number of
people who spend more time with the device increases,

the headset is one size fits all

the center of the split screen, the stationary lenses, and i'm assuming the
stereo render all presume everyone's eyes are the same distance apart and
perfectly level

which is simply untrue, and without configurable variables those minute
discrepancies will result in peoples' brains working much harder to compensate

my eyes went cross for an hour after taking off the headset the last time i
ever used my dk2, i wonder if i will be reading someone else's similar story
in the near future

~~~
lfowles
Quick google for "oculus interpupillary distance":

[http://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-says-consumer-rift-has-ipd-
ad...](http://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-says-consumer-rift-has-ipd-adjustment-
and-better-design-for-glasses/)

~~~
justifier
i stand corrected, and your linked article is even from june of last year as
well

i commend the oculus team for addressing the issue for the consumer product

that said, i think digital stereoscopy is the wrong direction for vision
manipulation

there are many minute issues similar to ipd that need to be addressed, an
engineering analogue to the curse of dimensionality

if one looks at the history of stereoscopic viewers it is clear they failed to
usurp their two dimensional counterparts and i think it of interest to
question why that may be

------
msabalau
Many interesting technologies aren't for mainstream users initially. Not
everything is a messaging app that can scale to billions of users with dozens
of engineers. It is okay to get things right with early adopters before
crossing the chasm.

------
KayL
I tried Gear VR before and very disappointed by Display resolution. Hoping
someone can tell the different between these 2 devices.

------
rwmj
How does it work with glasses? The original DK1 had an awkward set of lenses
that you had to place inside the headset.

~~~
mpd
A player with glasses is on Giant Bomb's stream as I type this, and says "it
ain't great". He's been at it 20-ish minutes.

~~~
drzaiusapelord
My reading of this is that he's unhappy with using a gamepad for VR, which is
understandable. I think the Vive is going to be much more impressive. Oculus
launching without proper touch controllers was a very risky move. I think
ultimately its going to hurt them, and people will be pissed that they need to
spend another $200 to get what anyone would consider a proper VR experience.

[https://www.reddit.com/r/Vive/comments/4cagl1/giant_bomb_liv...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Vive/comments/4cagl1/giant_bomb_live_stream_vr_with_gamepad_is_fucked/)

------
radicalman
This has been my suspicion. The new kids on the block are actually really
fucking great. In fact, they have so much hardware expertise and ready
audience to launch it mainstream, for example, ps vr

~~~
carc
I've heard the PS VR is very lacking. Source: [http://www.gizmag.com/best-vr-
headset-gdc-2016/42377/](http://www.gizmag.com/best-vr-headset-
gdc-2016/42377/)

