Oculus vs. Vive the new AMD vs. Nvidia?
- Thread starter Sanderson
- Start date
Fanboys are the same kind of people that will go "I'm better than you because this group of people I like, but that have never heard of me, was better at a sport then the group of people you like"
They are so insecure that when they have made a choice they feel the need to prove to themselves they made the right choice, by finding or making up flaws in the other choices.
The "war" shouldn't be between brands, but against those that dismiss VR without even trying it.
They are so insecure that when they have made a choice they feel the need to prove to themselves they made the right choice, by finding or making up flaws in the other choices.
The "war" shouldn't be between brands, but against those that dismiss VR without even trying it.
In this case you have a PC that can install both an Nvidia and AMD GPU at once because you can, like me, order both headsets. Therefore it's slightly different but nonetheless I take your point.
Humans are tribal monkeys. We will pick sides whenever we're in a group with a common interest and we see a group with an opposing interest. This reaches right into the core of our animal brain and explains much of the world throughout history.
Also, there's deep insecurity at work. People really aren't sure which headset is the best one and they're disturbed that they might have made the wrong choice if they can only afford one. They are desperate to justify their choice to keep themselves happy and that manifests as picking holes in the 'opposition'.
Competition is good in some ways though because it makes the manufacturers evolve features faster for the next generation of vr headsets. However, because of the internet, consumers have such a profound ability to offer opinion/feedback en-masse that we can end up with the tail wagging the dog. We don't get products to do a job well, we get products that satisfy the consumer opinion however riduculous. Super thin cellphones are a perfect example.
Humans are tribal monkeys. We will pick sides whenever we're in a group with a common interest and we see a group with an opposing interest. This reaches right into the core of our animal brain and explains much of the world throughout history.
Also, there's deep insecurity at work. People really aren't sure which headset is the best one and they're disturbed that they might have made the wrong choice if they can only afford one. They are desperate to justify their choice to keep themselves happy and that manifests as picking holes in the 'opposition'.
Competition is good in some ways though because it makes the manufacturers evolve features faster for the next generation of vr headsets. However, because of the internet, consumers have such a profound ability to offer opinion/feedback en-masse that we can end up with the tail wagging the dog. We don't get products to do a job well, we get products that satisfy the consumer opinion however riduculous. Super thin cellphones are a perfect example.
I do think that only one of the big 2 will go on in the next gen...If I would be a betting man I would bet on Oculus just because the financial health of HTC is really questionable and the company itself might not even be around for gen 2. But some other company might come in and buy the tech...My dream CV2 would be the Rift + Touch+ Lighthouse...
But all this fanboy crap is annoying, have you seen the Oculus Forum, Oculus Reddit, and VIVE reddit...it's like a schoolyard filled with bullies now.
But all this fanboy crap is annoying, have you seen the Oculus Forum, Oculus Reddit, and VIVE reddit...it's like a schoolyard filled with bullies now.
The company that wins is the one that will provide a reasonable headset for a reasonable cost of entry. Neither of the 2 big one qualify for this at the moment. If anything I'd say Sony has a better chance to be the driver than the other 2 at this point.
Oculus might have the better product, but it appears to be going the Apple way (in business decisions and offering), so it has to navigate the waters of exclusivity carefully else it could be stuck at about the same level of market share that Apple has.
HTC makes a great product and its partnership with valve ensure PC compatibility, however cost of entry is prohibitive for the device to become mass market - as is the Oculus.
Sony's offering, while of lower performance than the other 2 is priced such as it is much more affordable, even if you start with nothing. Yet its quality is excellent from most reviews. Forecast sales of the device that I've seen were 10-15% of the installed based the first year, or 2 to 3.5 million units. Even that might be low ball park judging on how quickly available pre-sales ran out. I said before and I am convinced now that trying to get the device by the holidays will be like the Wii craze a few years ago.
By mass market I mean 10s of millions of unit sold - which is what it takes to take the products out of the niche market and ensure that developers target such.
Its not to say that some other 3rd party in the wings comes to the forefront either.
Looks like I'll be getting a Vive later on this summer - as part of a computer update to a next gen graphic (and hopefully once the Can $ climbs some more...) I know I will also get the PSVR this fall, as I expect that the device is going to be the one that will garner the better dev support - even as it is of lower performance. I'm glad I can afford both and the computer upgrade, however I know that if things were otherwise I'd simply go for the PSVR as it ensure entry into VR at an affordable cost (and a *lot* of people will see it that way too).
Last edited:
Sony's VR entry's price is a trick. It doesn't come with controllers, headset or the camera. The "real" cost is closer to the Oculus than most think, maybe $20-$30 less, maybe.
Sony's real advantage is the consumer base already established and the fact that one doesn't need a $1000 PC to run it. Having said that, the Sony experience isn't nearly as good as the Oculus or the Vive.
It will be interesting, IMO, as all of them are poised for greatness if done right. What is right? Time will tell.
Sonys disadvantage is their track record of routinely dropping support for peripherals. Remember move?
I will get one if there are exclusive games I really want, but people that got burnt by move might be wary.
I will get one if there are exclusive games I really want, but people that got burnt by move might be wary.
If you want to play that game, then you need to add the cost of the touch (estimated $150?). Still quite a gap.
Of course the experience is not nearly as good. Even Sony acknowledge it. That's beside the point I'm trying to make above though - The experience is good enough, and it bring presence. Give that recipe plus an installed base, and you have a power keg. I'll eat crow pie and socks if I'm wrong on this. It does mean though that here on the PC world we will end up for the most part with hand me down experiences designed for the console first with a few exceptions until the PC side of the equation catches up.
As for those worried about Sony dropping support like the move, I would not too much. Sony is regarding this, and appear invested in this as a new platform. The closest I would put this at (and even then it's a rough comparison) is to the Vita and that device is still widely popular in Japan. The device is not really (and not viewed as) a peripheral, and it has something that the Move, of the Kinect, Wii controller and other gadgets lacked, presence when used. Trust that when people, the majority anyway, try HMDs the "I want to be there, and use one feeling" is pretty much overwhelming. HMDs are that powerful.
I would love to see quicker adoption on the PC, especially as I am about to invest another $1800(CAN) or so (GPU/VIVE) but realistically for the next few years once Sony's devices get to market PC gaming will go back to second fiddle to the consoles again.
How is it a trick? Do you realize how many homes have a PS4? They don't have to worry about upgrading their system specs to run it. They pay their 399.00, plug it in and go about their business. No worries about ports, ram, graphics cards, processors....nothin. That is a huge deal.
Vive and Oculus are going to be mainly enthusiasts at this point. I hope they both see enough return to show viability for their investments in their technology.
Last edited:
Because it doesn't come with the camera needed to operate it or the controllers or a headset, that's why. How many PS4 owners have the camera and move controllers? Not very many. Yes I do realize how many homes have a PS4, if you read my post you would know that.
Do you realize how many people will be mad as hell when the find out to get the experience in Sony's commercials they will need to spend another $250 on parts that are not included?
Did you even read my post or just the first sentence? Obviously you didn't get past the first line.
Next time please read more than just he first sentence before going off, it makes you look bad. Thank you.
Last edited:
I'm more interested in which hardware option will be most suitable for Elite Dangerous. The fact that there are http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/elite-dangerous-htc-vive-focus/ type articles causing confusion. Oculus has always struck me as the best option for Elite but if we don't have a clear statement from Frontier over which VR product they will focus on in future (assuming they will choose 1 and not 2), then it will put off Elite players, I'm already considering cancelling my Oculus order.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
Sure is looking like it. Fanboys around the world are already drawing lines. Good lord I hope not!
Take a moment and imagine with me a peaceful coexisting VR industry. One where Oculus and Vive share and work together.
Hey I can dream can't I?
so long as we do not get exclusives for either (time limited for a few months i can live with) then other than fanboys there will be no war imo.
however, if we start getting gated content for no reason other than "because" (ie not technical) then it could get messy and damage VR as a whole.
forget rift vs vive, At the moment the real bad guys in this is SonyVR. ***
starwars battlefront is already confirmed as exclusive VR content for the PSVR ..... Now I can live with sony studios doing this, but this is DICE doing it on a multiplatform game.
NMS, those devs were experimenting with oculus rift support years ago, and yet i believe there is no VR support as yet. I have no proof but i would wager money this is down to sony.... IF VR comes to NMS then imo it now will not be before PSVR is out, and to be honest i would not be surprised if sony lock that up to PSVR as well.
arguing between vive and rift is the wrong fight to be having imo.
(though admittedly if sonyVR gets the masses buying it as entry level VR then that in many ways is a good thing)
*** my view on this all changes the second it turns out oculus or valve are cockblocking support of other HMDs on any titles. afaik even EVE V and lucky's tale, oculus have said they are not against the devs adding support for other HMDs in there..... and in the case of luckys take, they funded it.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Atari vs Amiga all over again
That should never have even been a fight... Amiga all the way of course
Last edited:
No different than two soccer team going at it in the stands. People are tribal in nature and their choice is right, yours is wrong and woe to the person who states otherwise.
The larger the VR community, the better. The more choice, the more price levels, the more technology that's developed, benefits us all. Competition is always good at lowering prices and keeping companies honest. Imagine the price increases on Intel chips if AMD ever went under, as one example.
If you are happy with what you have, then that's all that matters.
The larger the VR community, the better. The more choice, the more price levels, the more technology that's developed, benefits us all. Competition is always good at lowering prices and keeping companies honest. Imagine the price increases on Intel chips if AMD ever went under, as one example.
If you are happy with what you have, then that's all that matters.
For starters, as of 2012 over 8.8 million consumers purchased the Playstation Move. I don't consider that 'not very many'. I think they ended up with 15 million sold total.
Also...they have a bundle for the Morpheus being sold for $499. That is the VRHD, two controllers, camera and some software. That is $100 additional for a complete system given you don't already own move controllers.
https://www.playstation.com/en-us/explore/playstation-vr/
So in closing...I think you may have needed to do some research before your initial post. Thank you and good day to you.
Thank you for your opinion. The PS4 threads are that way ------>
Those things stated were facts. I accept your surrender.
I surrender, I refuse to argue with an unarmed opponent. Kindly find the PS4 threads and carry on there. Thank you.
It's 80x86 vs 680x0, C64 vs Speccy, Atari vs Amiga all over again
Well.. thats easy! 68000, C64 and Amiga
.. even though i actually had a Atari XE at one stage :/
Hands up who else would want a version of 'Mercenary' modded into ED:H
) If only we could mod..
I'm not that bothered which headset FDev prioritise. They now support both. As far as I can see, the CV1 is a much better fit for their game. There's less faffing about to set it up. I'm finding the SteamVR "stay where you are" cage quite annoying. And most importantly... because both headsets use very similar displays and the CV1 has less of a field of view, this means the CV1's display will look clearer for spotting enemy ships in the distance.
I was going to wait for both headsets to be released before I made my choice, but after using SteamVR I've decided to buy the CV1. But only after the Oculus online shop is up and running and isn't as much of a pain to use as I fear it might be.
Last edited: