Vive or Rift?
- Thread starter Mercury7
- Start date
I returned both..... I'm sticking with a 1080 and 4K for now. I would wait a year or so and let the bugs be worked out. But, the Rift worked out of the box and the vive is more complicated to set up. The ability to move with the Vive is great, however, it is still limited at this time, IMO. The Vive is much more comfortable to wear. I didn't get as hot in it and I wear glasses. I thought the Rift looked better in ED and the ear buds are great. I'm not trying to be a negative nancy, as I want them both to succeed, so I can buy version 2 
BLUF: VR with a 1080 works well, but, it is not as crisp as 4K...
BLUF: VR with a 1080 works well, but, it is not as crisp as 4K...
Last edited:
Both are great, both excel in certain departments, just check out some videos, do some demos, and make your choice. Whether or not you want roomscale out of the box is the big factor: as you'll need to buy an extra sensor and the motion controllers for Rift for that. You'll want those controllers anyway, as Touch is REALLY nice.
1080 will be great, and the immersion urinates all over 4k screens. I wouldn't wait, VR was a gamechanger in 2014 and the thought of sitting out yet another generation of it strikes me as unthinkable. If you have the GPU juice and an interest in the tech, go for it. If you like sims, you'll be amused.
1080 will be great, and the immersion urinates all over 4k screens. I wouldn't wait, VR was a gamechanger in 2014 and the thought of sitting out yet another generation of it strikes me as unthinkable. If you have the GPU juice and an interest in the tech, go for it. If you like sims, you'll be amused.
Last edited:
![[HJ]-RedRaven](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/67/67389.jpg?1553527112){kind=avatar}
VR is great. I haven't played anything else for longer than 1/2 hour before going back to ED in VR. It's that good. I'm on a GTX1080, (PC as per sig below).
Its an emerging technology. If you bought into 3D during the 3Dfx days, then this generation of VR is smoother than that ride was, but there are still some issues.
Resolution is low (but a 1080 will allow some supersampling which lessens the impact of low res). Especially difficult for those coming from 4K monitors as jmp470 indicated.
Frame rates are a fixed 90fps - this sounds like its easy but VR works differently and the load is different compared to normal 2D games (including ED in 2D).
Its problematic if you have to wear glasses (short sighted or very longsighted need glasses but mildly longsighted or older wearers of reading glasses will be fine without glasses)
Some have issues with god-rays due to the fresnel lenses
Some have issues if they have big heads with very wide-set eyes. Same for tiny people.
Vive has slightly better colour, while the Rift has arguably better performance and ergonomics - but it really pays to try one on first. If you're an average joe then ether will fit fine.
The Galaxy map sucks in VR but you get used to it.
There's no virtual keyboard (yet)
But the simple ability to look around naturally, and in hand-controller enabled titles, to see your hands and use them, is absolutely brilliant.
Some users were disappointed and some simply had too-high expectations.
Others were not expecting what the Rift and Vive can do and were blown away.
Future generations will get better, there is no doubt, but waiting for better VR tech always comes with a 2D waiting room. Unless you happen to be in VR here with us, kicking NPC or player butt in ED VR.
Elite Dangerous really is the VR killer app right now, and may be for some time.
VR is pretty much seamless for the most part, and the bugs can be forgiven - its an awesome experience just to see the real scale of objects/ships/planets/moons/landing properly/driving on planets properly and freedom to move about your cockpit as if you were the real pilot is amazing.
Repeat.
AMAZING.
Its an emerging technology. If you bought into 3D during the 3Dfx days, then this generation of VR is smoother than that ride was, but there are still some issues.
Resolution is low (but a 1080 will allow some supersampling which lessens the impact of low res). Especially difficult for those coming from 4K monitors as jmp470 indicated.
Frame rates are a fixed 90fps - this sounds like its easy but VR works differently and the load is different compared to normal 2D games (including ED in 2D).
Its problematic if you have to wear glasses (short sighted or very longsighted need glasses but mildly longsighted or older wearers of reading glasses will be fine without glasses)
Some have issues with god-rays due to the fresnel lenses
Some have issues if they have big heads with very wide-set eyes. Same for tiny people.
Vive has slightly better colour, while the Rift has arguably better performance and ergonomics - but it really pays to try one on first. If you're an average joe then ether will fit fine.
The Galaxy map sucks in VR but you get used to it.
There's no virtual keyboard (yet)
But the simple ability to look around naturally, and in hand-controller enabled titles, to see your hands and use them, is absolutely brilliant.
Some users were disappointed and some simply had too-high expectations.
Others were not expecting what the Rift and Vive can do and were blown away.
Future generations will get better, there is no doubt, but waiting for better VR tech always comes with a 2D waiting room. Unless you happen to be in VR here with us, kicking NPC or player butt in ED VR.
Elite Dangerous really is the VR killer app right now, and may be for some time.
VR is pretty much seamless for the most part, and the bugs can be forgiven - its an awesome experience just to see the real scale of objects/ships/planets/moons/landing properly/driving on planets properly and freedom to move about your cockpit as if you were the real pilot is amazing.
Repeat.
AMAZING.
I've not tried the VIVE, but I can't see how much better it would be than my CV1. The CV1 is a lighter headset and its sensors contain no moving parts. The Touch controllers are like an XBOne gamepad chopped into two pieces and they have very ingenious rudimentary finger tracking as well as the motion tracking of the VIVE controllers.
I guess if money was no object then I would go for a VIVE as well, but that price would have to include the cost of a new house, because my current home isn't big enough to have a massive clear space for the full roomscale VR experience.
STEAM don't care what hardware you own. They just want to sell games. I downloaded SteamVR and enjoyed all their demo stuff. Valve have a great understanding of what makes a fun VR experience, and so I'm glad their stuff also works on the CV1 headset. It's a shame that Oculus Home is designed to keep out VIVE, and this locked-down walled-garden approach of FaceBook's headset could tempt me to buy a Valve-HTC headset when the next generation comes out.
I don't think this post will help you decide... sorry
I guess if money was no object then I would go for a VIVE as well, but that price would have to include the cost of a new house, because my current home isn't big enough to have a massive clear space for the full roomscale VR experience.
STEAM don't care what hardware you own. They just want to sell games. I downloaded SteamVR and enjoyed all their demo stuff. Valve have a great understanding of what makes a fun VR experience, and so I'm glad their stuff also works on the CV1 headset. It's a shame that Oculus Home is designed to keep out VIVE, and this locked-down walled-garden approach of FaceBook's headset could tempt me to buy a Valve-HTC headset when the next generation comes out.
I don't think this post will help you decide... sorry
Last edited:
You should wait a bit, for owning a DK2 and tested the CV1, the difference is not that big.
However, there are other alternative that will be available soon (it looks good on the paper)
http://www.theverge.com/ces/2017/1/2/14150054/lenovo-vr-headset-windows-holographic
- Lenovo says it’s targeting around 350g for the final product’s weight versus the Vive’s 555g
- The headset uses two 1440 x 1440 OLED panels for its display, making it higher resolution than both the Rift and the Vive
- Lenovo says the price isn’t set in stone but it’ll be “closer to $300
It might be good, it might be bad, but i will definitely wait new versions of VR headset, as the currents lack of good resolution and being comfortable
However, there are other alternative that will be available soon (it looks good on the paper)
http://www.theverge.com/ces/2017/1/2/14150054/lenovo-vr-headset-windows-holographic
- Lenovo says it’s targeting around 350g for the final product’s weight versus the Vive’s 555g
- The headset uses two 1440 x 1440 OLED panels for its display, making it higher resolution than both the Rift and the Vive
- Lenovo says the price isn’t set in stone but it’ll be “closer to $300
It might be good, it might be bad, but i will definitely wait new versions of VR headset, as the currents lack of good resolution and being comfortable
The only way you can really decide is to try them out. If you live in the UK PC World has demonstration suites for the HTC Vive at three locations. I don't know if they are showing the Oculus Rift anywhere;
http://www.pcworld.co.uk/gbuk/vive-vr-682-commercial.html
http://www.pcworld.co.uk/gbuk/vive-vr-682-commercial.html
Rift cv1 user here with 1080 palit graphics card and 2 sensors.
No tracking problems.
Vive or rift the immersion is great like stated elsewhere; you are in the game.
I am 62 and don't have the patience to wait much longer to play the game in VR.
I also use the lenzes from VR-Lens lab; they work great for me.
So if you can afford it : go VR Rift or Vive although my favorit is the Rift.
No tracking problems.
Vive or rift the immersion is great like stated elsewhere; you are in the game.
I am 62 and don't have the patience to wait much longer to play the game in VR.
I also use the lenzes from VR-Lens lab; they work great for me.
So if you can afford it : go VR Rift or Vive although my favorit is the Rift.
Last edited:
That's one hell of a false claim of a title, "holographic". It smells a little of clickbait. The headset itself does look nice and comfortable, although I'm not sure about the whole inside-out tracking business. I know that it is something that people have worked on, but it seems like a whole heap of extra work for not much to show for it.
I doubt that it will be appearing in the shops anytime soon, but I've got my CV1 to keep me happy until the headset's out and it has been on the heads of people whose reviews I trust.
The specifications and promise to keep the price down is a good thing though. It will keep the other manufacturers on their toes.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
1080 is great!
For ED rift is the best option right now
for everything else, i cant really comment, as each has their strengths and weaknesses.
if full room 360 degree motion control tracking is your thing, then you want to get 3 sensors if you go rift........ the headset comes with one, the touch controllers come with one, and then an extra one is another £79
this does make the rift marginally more expensive than the vive BUT you end up with more free games, an xbox1 pad and wireless adapter and some say that in an average room size ( 3mx3m or less) the tracking with the rift with 3 cameras has the edge over light house with 2. i cant comment on that myself tho, this is 3rd hand info.
me personally i have a rift with touch controllers and 3 cameras and its great! (it took some minor faffing around, positioning the cameras took 2 attempts before i was happy with it and i had to balance the load on my usb 3 hub on my motherboard - in honesty i prefer the lighthouse design, as its a pain having all my usb ports full with wires all over the place from my PC. next gen it will be a non issue, as oculus already have a reverse tracking prototype in house but for now..... it is a pain..
look at the hand controllers and see which you prefer - touch or wands - and then look at the hmds and see which you prefer. they both have +ves and -ves so read the youtube vids (vive slightly higher FOV but greater screen door effects). rift has godrays, vive has slight smearing instead of godrays, rift slightly better image quality, vive slighly better contrast..... vive with 2 light houses has better tracking than rift with 2 sensors.
rift has asyncronous time ward and space warp, vive has asynchromous reprojection - which right now the rift is better on that front.
in my experience, for the rift, steamVR does not track as well as native oculus sdk software. luckily most games, even on steam, offer a native oculus mode.
I too owned a DK2 and i must admit, whilst the image quality is not night and day improvements, i have never regretted upgrading.. the image quality IS noticably better, its more comfortable, then there are the motion controls..... and the 360 degree tracking, and the fact that from the next update onwards all bets are off if DK2 will continue to be supported - oculus only promised dk2 support up to 31/12/16
For me, i chose the rift this gen, and have never once regretted it, but there are totally valid reasons to choose the vive - for me the biggest vive advantage is it not using shedloads of usbs, you just need 2 power points for the light house units which leaves just the wires going to the hmd from your pc
(later i the year there will be a wireless upgrade for the vive, which whilst i am sceptical, early reports are promising).
Last edited:
yes, i agree, it seems to good to be true, but i'm rather optimistic today ( hey, 2017 has just started
)I'm looking forward to a light headset with a high resolution, the current one are not enough (in my opinion)
yes, i agree, it seems to good to be true, but i'm rather optimistic today ( hey, 2017 has just started
I'm looking forward to a light headset with a high resolution, the current one are not enough (in my opinion)
To be fair it wasn't Lenovo that was making the claim, The Verge are just trying to attract people to their website.
I don't think your optimism is out of place. The mobile screens just keep getting better and better. My nephew showed me Google Cardboard using his snazzy new phone and the resolution was fantastic. It's almost been a year since the CV1 was launched. There's bound to be big announcements... soon.
Last edited:
I deliberated long and hard and went for the Rift for reasons of comfort, graphics quality and not really having the space (or need - since I bought it to play Elite) for roomscale. That said ..
.. that's no longer a reason. The Oculus Touch controllers are a work of ergonomic VR design genius and, with the addition of a second Oculus sensor (which comes with the controllers) now support hand tracking just as well (and arguably better) than the Vive controllers. In addition, with the Oculus you have access to all the Oculus store content AND most if not all of the SteamVR content (I'm happily using both "Google Earth VR" and Valve's brilliant "The Lab" without any problems).
Oh god, absolutely. The 1080 is a beast that can easily handle VR. It's actually more than sufficient, you can run VR with a 970.
Last edited:
Vive owner here.
Firstly, as many have already stated, the game does look somewhat poor in VR given how amazing it looks on a monitor, but you VERY soon (like, instantly) learn to forgive the graphical shortcomings when you see how breathtakingly amazing ED is with the headset on.
I have 700 odd games in my Steam library with about 60 of those VR capable, and I haven't spent more than 45 minutes tops in ANY of those games. I've owned ED since Christmas, and have had my Vive stuck on my face for almost 50 hours.
I own two 980Tis and have a 4k IPS monitor and I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that ED in VR absolutely s all over 4k @ 144fps. There's simply no comparison between the two. On a monitor, you're playing a space game. On a Vive, you ARE a pilot and you ARE in space.
So again, the resolution is pretty poor even at HMDIQ set at 2.0, but the wow factor of the entire experience absolutely makes up for it hands down.
Firstly, as many have already stated, the game does look somewhat poor in VR given how amazing it looks on a monitor, but you VERY soon (like, instantly) learn to forgive the graphical shortcomings when you see how breathtakingly amazing ED is with the headset on.
I have 700 odd games in my Steam library with about 60 of those VR capable, and I haven't spent more than 45 minutes tops in ANY of those games. I've owned ED since Christmas, and have had my Vive stuck on my face for almost 50 hours.
I own two 980Tis and have a 4k IPS monitor and I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that ED in VR absolutely s all over 4k @ 144fps. There's simply no comparison between the two. On a monitor, you're playing a space game. On a Vive, you ARE a pilot and you ARE in space.
So again, the resolution is pretty poor even at HMDIQ set at 2.0, but the wow factor of the entire experience absolutely makes up for it hands down.
Last edited:
Not sure what you're basing this on, but the Vive works amazingly well at room scale.
I meant the head banging to make it work with ED as well as the Rift does by nature. Shoulda made that clearer.
The Rift not actually having room scaling would kinda shoot someone down for bashing the Vive's room scaling anyway
Last edited:
There are dozens of demo sites for both across the UK now; e.g. PC World in Leicester has them side-by-side (unfortunately I didn't get to try the Vive as they'd only just set it up when I visited in November, and I haven't been back since).
Oculus demos:
https://live.oculus.com/
Vive demos:
http://locator.vive.com/
(Putting in "<town>, United Kingdom" seems to work as a search term to get UK locations).
I suggest you carefully think through your options and your desires, to prevent possible disappointment. Also, consider upgrading your PC and/or graphics card together with VR.
Here is a nice article on this subject I found recently, see page 3: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/05/why-vive-has-won-the-early-vr-race-in-my-house/3/
I have to say the article sums up my experiences quite nicely. I bought the Vive in September, it's a great piece of HW, looks very nice in most Vive games, but I was shocked how ugly Elite looks (without using supersampling). After several weeks of fiddling with settings/tweaks/programs I found a sweetspot for my machine and I love how immersive it feels to play Elite in VR. But my new GTX 1070 is not strong enough to turn on supersampling... My heart sinks every time I arrive at a Coriolis station, they just look like a big pixelated mess from the outside...
Here is a nice article on this subject I found recently, see page 3: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/05/why-vive-has-won-the-early-vr-race-in-my-house/3/
I have to say the article sums up my experiences quite nicely. I bought the Vive in September, it's a great piece of HW, looks very nice in most Vive games, but I was shocked how ugly Elite looks (without using supersampling). After several weeks of fiddling with settings/tweaks/programs I found a sweetspot for my machine and I love how immersive it feels to play Elite in VR. But my new GTX 1070 is not strong enough to turn on supersampling... My heart sinks every time I arrive at a Coriolis station, they just look like a big pixelated mess from the outside...