Interesting alternative to Oculus Rift?

[AbortedMan]

Saw this on Kotaku today...Avegant's Virtual Retinal Display, apparently it's an HMD that skips the LCD/OLED screen and beams the image directly on to your retinas. According to Cnet interviews, it's a very comfortable, crisp, and colorful image:

 

http://reviews.cnet.com/wearable-tech/avegant-virtual-retinal-display/4505-34900_7-35828603.html

 

Here's the Kotaku article:

 

http://kotaku.com/the-slightly-terrifying-alternative-to-oculus-rift-1444669803

 

Their kickstarter is 2 days in and already they've doubled their goal. Pretty exciting/interesting.

[DD_bongodriver]

certainly interesting, can they compete in the price range, this kit looks much more expensive.

[SR-F_Winger]

Ist a HMD, not a VR Headset. More of a competition to sony and zeiss. 45° FOV ist nothing to desire if you want to be immersed. No competition to OculusVR.

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

yes but easier on the eyes and able to wear headset better.

[SR-F_Winger]

Well guys. Then buy one:) Ill go for the Rift since everyone that is into actual VR will tell you the same about the Avegant. Also i owned a Rift and i know what i am talking about. Just go ahead and view all the reviews and youll see the one is a HMD with low FOV and the other a VR headset. Also I prefer being able to use my high fidelity Headset over some mediocre "comeswiththeactualhardware" device.

Dont get me wrong. I bet the avegant is and awesome piece of hardware. And most likely watching your movies on it is an awesome experience. But when it comes to immersion there simply is nothing that compares to the Rift and does not get shred to pieces by the direct comparison.

[ATAG_Slipstream]

Is there a price for the retail oculus rift yet?

[DD_bongodriver]

No but the general concensu is the current price for the DK is in the ballpark, certainly the whole idea was to keep it sub $500, this is supposed to be VR for the masses.

[ATAG_Slipstream]

Hopefully if it is a success that will come down, its still a considerable amount of money.

[DD_bongodriver]

it's cheaper than 3 measuperwidecrazy monitors + TIR.........and better.

Edited January 24, 2014 by DD_bongodriver

[ATAG_Slipstream]

TBH I am happy with my 32" TV and TiR, so it would have to be a quantum leap for me to even think about a Rift at that price  point, and its difficult to tell from user video's.

[DD_bongodriver]

quantum leap it is.

[Mogster]

It does appear to be a direct OC competitor, how mature is the tech though? It could have gaming applications but the dev's don't mention gaming much, only movies strangely.

[Sternjaeger]

my only concern with this goggle malarkey is whether it might actually cause any excessive eye strain, is there any medical report on the matter?

Something about the idea of the image being projected directly onto my retina makes me uncomfortable.

 

well images are constantly projected into your retina, this system seems to mimic in a more accurate way the "mechanics" of ocular vision. but yes, one can't stop thinking of an electrical surge and a laser zapping through your skull... 

[DD_bongodriver]

My own experience with my DK says there are no eye strain issues, once it is set up with the correct IPD's it feels completely natural on the eyes, I can wear it for an hour and my eyes make no adjustment at all when I take it off.

Something about the idea of the image being projected directly onto my retina makes me uncomfortable.

 

 

Technically that is what is happening to you right now.

[SR-F_Winger]

Please explain why the Avegant has head tracking.

 

I don't see a purpose for head tracking whilst watching a movie.

 

Every article that discusses the Avegant talks about it's use as a VR device, even talking about possible military and medical uses (as they always do when the topic of VR comes up)

 

I know you're a fully paid up member of the Rift supporters club, and that's fine, but it's OK to accept that there might be alternatives too.

 

PS. I don't have a strong opinion one way or another, I just prefer objectivity over ignorance.

Yes fine:)

I said everything i had to on that topic. Very objective.

Edited January 24, 2014 by VSG1_Winger

[Mogster]

I can imagine there could be medical applications at some point. Lots of people have eyes with partially failed focusing systems....

[DD_bongodriver]

I can imagine there could be medical applications at some point. Lots of people have eyes with partially failed focusing systems....

 

 

many more with completely failed intellects, hence why we have warning labels on like everything nowadays.

[Kaenzdhi]

OR is designed for cyclops . very low horizontal FOV.

 

Infiniteyes 210° FOV is much more promising for flight simulation

 

http://www.roadtovr.com/infiniteeye-worlds-first-ever-hands-210-fov-hmd-video/

https://developer.oculusvr.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=3604

[DD_bongodriver]

OR is designed for cyclops . very low horizontal FOV.

 

 

very low?

[Kaenzdhi]

very low?

Yep, very low

[DD_bongodriver]

Yep, very low

 

How so?, it's wider than any other apart from the infiniteye.

[Kaenzdhi]

The aspect ratio is bad, 90 degrees horizontal and 110 degrees vertical.

You have a more greater vertival FOV than horizontal FOV. It's doesn't fit the correct human fov (only for cyclops). For flight simming, it's not good

110° horizontal and 90° vertical would have been a little better

Edited January 24, 2014 by Scorlhov

[DD_bongodriver]

so it's not very low then, simply not as wide as you feel it should be, which is likely to be addressed in the consumer release, meanwhile infiniteye is still pieces of plastic card and duct tape.

[Sternjaeger]

[Kaenzdhi]

so it's not very low then, simply not as wide as you feel it should be

 

You are Right.

With my 52'' HDTV, my FOV is 90°. It's too low

I think 120° FOV is the minimum for flight simming

[DD_bongodriver]

I think Star Treck holodeck is the minimum, but I will take the Oculus for now.

[AbortedMan]

If anyone watched the video on the CNet link, the CEO of Avagant stated their main focus is on a media experience right now, with video gaming to come in the future...and the form factor isn't final, it's just an umpteenth iteration of a prototype, again, stated by the Avagant CEO in the video.

 

You guys don't have to argue subjectively about which HMD is better, it's just interesting to see new technology being introduced and effectively start the "race" between the big VR contenders in the market.

[SR-F_Winger]

+1:)

[Kaenzdhi]

 but I will take the Oculus for now.

 

It's your monney

[DD_bongodriver]

It's your monney

 

 

Well an extensive search for wegiveawaymegasuperbetterthanoculusvrheadsetsforfree.com proved fruitless.

[JG27_Chivas]

Infiniteye looks very interesting.  Especially since it appears to be using an off the shelf internal 6DOF hardware with no external camera, and the reviewer didn't notice any latencies.   It will  be interesting to see if game developers can easily implement more than one type of VR unit access to their sims.  A key for me is the VR units ability to physically adjust its IPD, and focus.  FOV is another key where it would have to be atleast a persons possible FOV as seen from pilots goggles or higher.

[DD_bongodriver]

atleast a persons possible FOV as seen from pilots goggles or higher.

 

 

Oculus already does this with the DK

[JG27_Chivas]

Oculus already does this with the DK

Yes, I'm well aware of that, and the FOV should be even higher with the CV1.    Whats very important to me is the IPD adjustment, as you know the current prototypes only have an IPD software adjustment, and different lenses for focus etc, which is far less than satisfactory.  Thankfully the developers are well aware of the issue and are talking about being able to physically adjust the  IPD and focus in future prototypes. 

[ll./JG77_JadeBandit]

The developer mentioned in the video that it takes a lower resolution image and projects it into a much higher perceived resolution, which they claim is twice that of what the current HD version of the Rift is capable of.

 

So I wonder what effect this would have on gaming, since you could use a lower resolution and still get high fidelity and better image quality, sounds like a pretty big performance gain. If the price is competitive this could be a deal breaker if they do target the gaming industry.