- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Are you going to hop onto the VR wagon?
Posted on 1/11/16 at 10:04 am
Posted on 1/11/16 at 10:04 am
I have been watching FreddieW's old partner Brandon develop his new game Hover Junkers on the HTC Vive and it makes me curious but I see it as nothing more than a fad at this point. It looks really cool but it may be a while before it's mainstream enough to justify the investment. Plus, I never like being an early adopter of such new tech.
This video from Node does look fun though.
This video from Node does look fun though.
16
Posted on 1/11/16 at 10:06 am to stout
Most people just aren't going to have the PC hardware required to do VR
Posted on 1/11/16 at 10:07 am to SG_Geaux
I would think a 970 or above and an i5 would be plenty.
Posted on 1/11/16 at 10:07 am to stout
Given the $600 price tag for the rift, I am going to wait.
First to make sure the tech actually works and second to see what game companies jump in.
Without support, it will fail fast.
Reviews have been very positive, but it will only succeed with the right games jumping in.
First to make sure the tech actually works and second to see what game companies jump in.
Without support, it will fail fast.
Reviews have been very positive, but it will only succeed with the right games jumping in.
Posted on 1/11/16 at 10:20 am to stout
So many journalists that I trust have raved about the Oculus (and products like it) that they've convinced me to eventually jump in but I won't be an early adopter for it. I don't think it will be a fad but it's going to be a few years before we see it even become moderately mainstream. The cost of the devices themselves is too high and the hardware requirements are too.
Applications for VR also extend well beyond gaming, but that's an entirely different discussion.
ETA: Also, anyone remember this fake announcement video for the "Nintendo ON?" This was released before Nintendo announced the Wii. Pretty funny.
LINK
Applications for VR also extend well beyond gaming, but that's an entirely different discussion.
ETA: Also, anyone remember this fake announcement video for the "Nintendo ON?" This was released before Nintendo announced the Wii. Pretty funny.
LINK
This post was edited on 1/11/16 at 10:25 am
Posted on 1/11/16 at 10:25 am to stout
[/URL][/img] I'm gonna wait for at least a couple of gens before even considering.
Posted on 1/11/16 at 10:27 am to stout
I live in VR.
Posted on 1/11/16 at 10:43 am to Devious
Trailer Park Sim '99
Posted on 1/11/16 at 11:34 am to stout
Lol no. Waste of money
Posted on 1/11/16 at 1:56 pm to stout
No because I wear glasses.
Posted on 1/11/16 at 2:06 pm to Duzz
Yeah. I need to have lasek first.
Posted on 1/11/16 at 2:16 pm to stout
No
Posted on 1/11/16 at 2:22 pm to stout
quote:
I would think a 970 or above and an i5 would be plenty
Not really. You are pushing dual screens at 2160+ at 90fps, its hard to push just 1 screen at 90fps on AAA titles.
Posted on 1/11/16 at 2:24 pm to stout
Yeah, this is something I'm going to wait a long time to adopt. The resolution per eye on the display needs to at least double if not quadruple.
It's 1080x1200 per eye, right? 2160x1200 total, 25% more pixels than 1080P. A 970 can handle that at modest settings, especially the smattering of VR-exclusive games that will make a point to accommodate less-than-flagship hardware.
quote:
You are pushing dual screens at 2160+ at 90fps, its hard to push just 1 screen at 90fps on AAA titles.
It's 1080x1200 per eye, right? 2160x1200 total, 25% more pixels than 1080P. A 970 can handle that at modest settings, especially the smattering of VR-exclusive games that will make a point to accommodate less-than-flagship hardware.
This post was edited on 1/11/16 at 2:33 pm
Posted on 1/11/16 at 2:26 pm to ILikeLSUToo
This is why I don't see how ps vr can not suck
Posted on 1/11/16 at 2:43 pm to ILikeLSUToo
Thought it was 2160/90fps per eye?
If it is 1200/90fps per eye than yeah, but shtt the res is terrible.
If it is 1200/90fps per eye than yeah, but shtt the res is terrible.
Posted on 1/11/16 at 2:47 pm to LSU Coyote
Okay the Vive from Valve/HTC does look fun. Much more than Occulus.
Posted on 1/11/16 at 2:55 pm to LSU Coyote
quote:
If it is 1200/90fps per eye than yeah, but shtt the res is terrible.
Right, 1200/90fps per eye, and yeah that is just too low.
Posted on 1/11/16 at 3:30 pm to LSU Coyote
quote:
Okay the Vive from Valve/HTC does look fun. Much more than Occulus.
Yea I would get the Vive over the Occulus if I did buy one.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News