Mmmmmm. That's some nice looking hardware. Not appearing like you had a medical device strapped to your face was one of my driving decisions for picking the Rift over the Vive. And the simple straps and soft touch fabrics look really nice and comfortable here.
But I have yet to find any lasting appeal to the "low-end" VR experiences. It really gives a poor impression of what the tech is capable of and walk away with a "gimmicky" feeling.
I'd argue that even "high-end" VR leaves many with a bad impression walking away with a "gimmicky" feeling. The Rift continues to be the worst technology investment I've made, no amount of personal enthusiasm for the concept makes up for the fact many people get motion sick on these things eventually. Feeling sick for "fun" in my free time is not up there with my favorite leisure activities.
Outside of a handful of impressive tech demos (RoboRecall etc), the vast majority of the content on the Rift is equally low rent too.
But man, it totally blew my mind how good and immersive it is. Maybe the strongest feeling of "wow, we really live in the future" I've had. The low latency combined with excellent controls really creates a feeling of being there. Google Earth by itself is worth the price of Oculus many times over. Then there are titles like Lone Echo, Robo Recall, Beat Saber, Skyrim VR, Quake 1 and Quake 2, Minecraft etc etc. Sure there aren't a ton of AAA titles yet but those that are hold an amazing quality IMO and has spoiled me from "normal" gaming
When iPhone came out, the games were gimmicky.
Same for Facebook platform.
And then there was Farmville. And then there was Angry Birds. And then there was Pokemon Go.
Games which were designed AROUND the limitations of the platform, rather than being a crappy stripped down version of previous fully realized gaming experiences.
Oculus Go launch title and also Samsung GearVR support
[1] https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018/05/oculus-go-review-the-...
That said, resolution is not the greatest asset. I doubt this device improves on that – if anything it will probably be worse.
What blows people away is not the display, it's the head and position tracking, of both the HMD and the controls. It's amazing how you can "see" them and accurately pick them up on a table. I hope this device has that.
It's actually higher resolution than the Rift.
Or are drones oriented only by hand-held controls?
Why do I have to have my head and face oriented toward a virtual screen? Why would I want to look down at a virtual coffee table, or up at a virtual ceiling, or behind me at a virtual couch while the movie is playing at some fraction of the device's resolution in a different virtual direction?
2. The screen simulates your full range of vision. So to fill it edge to edge would be impossible to watch. You would have to pick an arbitrary fraction of the screen to show at a time. Why not set up a virtual space where you can move closer or further away from the screen or move around like you can in real space? Self configuring!
As for it adding to the experience, for optimal viewing in real life, we turn off the lights precisely to avoid the surroundings from distracting from the experience...
This is before I get into the Touch controllers which become invisible the fit so naturally to your hand.
Really like the design of the Go too but wont be buying one because for me the hand presence is what makes VR.
It does offer better ease of use (always ready, no messing with docking your phone) and a lighter weight. Additionally it (obviously) doesn't take away from your phone's battery life.
Again, I'm sure you're aware of all that, but I'd hate for someone to spend $200, expecting something that this is not.