(The Vive Pro will also support a tracking-area boost of up to 10 square meters [https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/10/valve-announces-the-f...], which requires four 2.0 base stations.)
I read this and thought "Hmm, 10 sq meters sounds small. That about 3.1m x 3.1m (10 ft x 10 ft), which is about the same maximum as the current Vive". Not impossible, but an odd boast to make about make about the new Pro unit, and funny that it requires more base stations to be able to match the old one.
Then I read the link:
The new base station protocol will only support two tracking boxes at first (just like the HTC Vive), but Valve promises that they'll receive an update in "early 2018" to support two more tracking boxes to grow the total tracking range to 10 meters squared, or 32.8 feet squared (1,075 square feet). That's quite the jump from SteamVR's current max of 11.5 feet squared
Oh, I see now what's happening! Instead of 10 square meters, they mean that you that the new version will support a 10m x 10m room (30 ft x 30 ft), which indeed is much greater than the current 3.5m x 3.5m (11.5 ft x 11.5 ft) max. But their own earlier writeup was so confusing and innumerate that they couldn't figure out what it meant!
Maybe "innumerate" is too harsh, but how does a technical site like Ars muck things like this up? Am I being too optimistic when I still hope that both the author and editor should have caught this? Hurried author and no editor? Or is someone teaching that "X units squared" is a valid way of specifying a square room of X units per side?
Higher resolution screens are great, but I find that the screens are often not the limiting factor for image quality in my current setup. The optics blur everything outside the central region and introduce light smearing artifacts. The head mount makes it difficult to keep my eyes in the sweet spot of the lenses. My GPU isn't powerful enough to drive the supersampling required to reduce aliasing to an acceptable level in many games, because devs aren't paying enough attention to aliasing.
I'll be interested to see people's impressions of the new optics and head mount, but I probably won't be buying one until the next generation of GPUs is out, along with the new lighthouses and controllers and wireless support. Maybe a year from now or so.
Glad to see HTC continuing development even in hard times, I think they really got the tracking system right.
I owned a first generation Vive and I think the resolution and wireless (not included with Pro but official solution coming) would be massive steps forward to make it what I would consider 'usable' for the average person and ready for adoption outside of niche games. Still a tremendous cost for all the hardware and a PC that can push 90+ fps to it though.
I'm super excited for the Pimax 8K headset , supposedly shipping early this year. This resolution upgrade shows that HTC is still in the game though, contrary to the rumors that they are giving up.
I wonder how this addresses the screen door aspect of VR? I notice it particularly in Fallout 4 VR, and really would like a resolution upgrade. It runs smoothly enough already on a 1080
To me it looks like a good choice for someone who hasn't bought a VR headset yet. But if you already own one you probably wouldn't upgrade?
Why is the resolution still so low?
Why not even 4K combined?
I would be wary of buying any HTC products after having gone through a warranty repair with them. They took 10.5 weeks to repair my phone, never sent me any updates about it. They only returned it after I spent about a week arguing with them over the phone for about an our each day. Lots more horror stories on /r/HTC
So the resolution is actually only about 10% higher than the Windows MR devices, which have a combined 2880x1440 resolution. And the Wireless Adapter isn't included in the Pro model, that's separate. The Windows MR headsets are all significantly cheaper than the Vive as well, and I find my HP headset to be quite a bit more comfortable than my Vive. Finally, the Windows MR headsets are compatible with Steam VR with an official plugin from Microsoft.
I mean, I will still probably buy it, but if you're looking for a decent headset now, it's already available.
Aside: I wonder what the Wireless Adapter entails, because both the Vive and the Windows MR headsets run on standard HDMI and USB 3.
WMR devices already have the same resolutionannd have theoretically unlimited play areas. They cost less than half the Vive Pro. I don’t see how this is a “next gen” VR device
I wanted to play with the Rift and develop some apps for it, but the Mac isn't supported. So I got an external GPU to power it. Using Windows, because they abandoned Mac driver development. That's EUR 449 for the Rift and EUR 699 for the eGPU incl. the respective GPU. EUR 1198.
I eventually returned the Rift because I couldn't find a reasonable way to get it working with my Mac. I was checking out the Vive because everyone seems to be using it for development. It's EUR 699. WOW. That's when I thought: "screw it."
I would love to build something with it. It seems to have so much potential. But I really think that the current prices for the headsets are simply outrageous.
For me, it's far too expensive for a hobby. Maybe when it's more affordable. I don't want to know how much the "Pro" will cost.