Oculus TV Offers Virtual 180" Smart TV - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 1Likes
  • 1 Post By Nuieve
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 13 Old 06-25-2018, 03:11 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Scott Wilkinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 3,258
Mentioned: 93 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1881 Post(s)
Liked: 4905
Oculus TV Offers Virtual 180" Smart TV

Today, Oculus announced the availability of Oculus TV for the Oculus Go VR headset. First announced at the F8 Facebook developers conference last month, Oculus TV is designed to be a "smart TV for VR." Within a virtual living room, you can watch 2D video content from a variety of providers on what appears to be a 180" flat-panel TV.

Click here for more...
Scott Wilkinson is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 13 Old 06-25-2018, 05:28 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,906
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1993 Post(s)
Liked: 1896
my personal feeling on this, would be that it's an interesting feature i might use if i already had the product, but i can't imagine this ever being the REASON i buy the product. at least not with current pricing and form factors. i can certainly see a time when this is considered normal, especially in the dorm room, or a teenagers room. but i think we need to see a time when vr gaming is considered normal/average first.

i'm also just gonna go ahead and state that claiming 180" without stating a viewing distance is nothing more than marketing BS. i suspect that 180" to provide no more immersion than most 120" projection setups

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #3 of 13 Old 06-25-2018, 10:44 PM
Senior Member
 
Nuieve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 266
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post
my personal feeling on this, would be that it's an interesting feature i might use if i already had the product, but i can't imagine this ever being the REASON i buy the product. at least not with current pricing and form factors. i can certainly see a time when this is considered normal, especially in the dorm room, or a teenagers room. but i think we need to see a time when vr gaming is considered normal/average first.

i'm also just gonna go ahead and state that claiming 180" without stating a viewing distance is nothing more than marketing BS. i suspect that 180" to provide no more immersion than most 120" projection setups
Pretty much. I tried original Oculus for a few weeks, hated it. The screen door was simply terrible. Not even looking at another VR set until we have 8k and some serious FOV like 150 deg or something. Don't want to see borders.

I'm actually only interested in VR for movies. Don't care about games and demos. But I would buy it for movies. Give me a 200" from like 12ft. with the actual screen within the vr theater having enough pixels to keep it at 4k and you have my money.
Nuieve is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 13 Old 06-26-2018, 06:34 AM
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 868
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 519 Post(s)
Liked: 292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuieve View Post
Pretty much. I tried original Oculus for a few weeks, hated it. The screen door was simply terrible. Not even looking at another VR set until we have 8k and some serious FOV like 150 deg or something. Don't want to see borders.
Fair enough. 210 degree FOV and at least 1440p per eye is quite nice, much more immersive. It's coming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuieve View Post
I'm actually only interested in VR for movies. Don't care about games and demos. But I would buy it for movies. Give me a 200" from like 12ft. with the actual screen within the vr theater having enough pixels to keep it at 4k and you have my money.
As someone who's worked on 360 VR video-making, I don't find 3DOF movies that compelling, personally, compared to a projector, since most of the time, the action is focused in one direction anyway, so why bother.

If you could move your head around, that would be something else. I know several companies are working on 6DOF VR films, but you can still barely move your head a few inches in each direction, which is kinda cool and better for the sense of tele-presence, but still not really that much better than a traditional flick.

To me VR is all about interactivity, and that's either simulations or games. Watching long movies with a heavy headset on is also a nuisance. Once these HMDs get lighter and more comfortable I agree it will become a better option, at least for mobile watching when the family is watching a different show on the main TV.

The Go seems like it fits the bill slightly better than the GearVR, but not by much. I already have a 1440p OLED for my GearVR and 3DOF.
BattleAxeVR is offline  
post #5 of 13 Old 06-26-2018, 12:52 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
HeadRusch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 10,378
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 233 Post(s)
Liked: 169
Supposedly the reason the Rift and Vive have the FOV's they have today, and why we are not seeing major advances in FOV's inside VR headsets coming out today by any great margin, is because there's a real problem with Motion Sickness when you expand the FOV inside a headset..as in you can't even stand, you topple over at the slightest movement, something the "restricted" FOV of current HMD's address by simply giving us a little bit of that "helmet" effect.

There was a story recently on the web about the US military testing more tech, and one of the stories was they are testing windowless vehicles, supplemented by arrays of 360 degree cameras. They mentioned in passing that one of the biggest problems driving this way (using cameras to cover an array of screens, or using an augmented reality headset or VR to see via the camera systems) is motion sickness for the drivers. We have some ways to go before we solve the brain/motion equation in VR and, it seems, in AR as well. Remember, these guys are inside the vehicle and feeling the motion...there is still a disconnect using the augmented or virtual camera screens, it seems.

As for the limitations of the current generation of hardware, the Rift is the most unique game experiences I've had in my life, and with every new game release I have a new experience. For someone like me, this is priceless stuff. But that's me, and I get why people want to wait for 'better specs'. Thing is, I'm not sure those better specs are coming soon.
Higher Rez is a nice to have, but requires GPU's capable of delivering. I don't want dual 4K panels....and running games that look like 2008 mobile titles cuz that's all the GPU's can push at that time. I think they are probably waiting for GPU's to catch up AND come down in price where resolution is concerned, but that FOV problem I think is harder to solve for.
We'll see.

Xbox Live / PS3 / Steam: HeadRusch1
Keeping the world safe from the evil antics of Bernie Tanaka and Mel Fujitsu since 1986


Last edited by HeadRusch; 06-26-2018 at 12:57 PM.
HeadRusch is online now  
post #6 of 13 Old 06-26-2018, 04:03 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Scott Wilkinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 3,258
Mentioned: 93 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1881 Post(s)
Liked: 4905
As far as I know, the VR headset with the highest resolution and widest FOV is the upcoming Pimax 8K VR: 7680x2160 (3840x2160 per eye), 200° FOV, $500. I don't know when, or even if, it will be available to consumers, and if so, how well it will be supported by content creators. All other headsets I know of are mostly in the 2160 to 2560x1400 range with about 100° FOV.
Scott Wilkinson is offline  
post #7 of 13 Old 06-27-2018, 01:47 AM
Senior Member
 
Nuieve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 266
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Liked: 47
I personally don't need the actual VR thing, as in all that head movement inside...

All I want is a fixed HUGE screen in front of me in the helmet. Not VR. Just a "portable personal enormous home theater in a helmet".

I wonder if there's any market for that. Just take an Oculus, throw some 8k panels in it, but leave out all the VR stuff out, and just make it a movie player, simplify it. None of the nausea and requiring a mega computer drawbacks

If I can have a 200" screen in front of me while sitting on a toilet... oh man...
dfa973 likes this.
Nuieve is offline  
post #8 of 13 Old 06-27-2018, 06:14 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pottscb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,708
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 306 Post(s)
Liked: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuieve View Post
I personally don't need the actual VR thing, as in all that head movement inside...

All I want is a fixed HUGE screen in front of me in the helmet. Not VR. Just a "portable personal enormous home theater in a helmet".

I wonder if there's any market for that. Just take an Oculus, throw some 8k panels in it, but leave out all the VR stuff out, and just make it a movie player, simplify it. None of the nausea and requiring a mega computer drawbacks...
I agree, just a huge and high-quality display in a light package for not more than $400 (and make a way to pipe in movies and video games because content makes or breaks any new platform). Problem I see is the higher quality AND lighter package may be many generations/years off and if there is no early adoption then it'll never fly as R&D budgets will dry up.

What ever happened to glasses free 3D that was ready for imminent release at CEDIA/CES a few years ago? I'd still like to see that happen...
pottscb is online now  
post #9 of 13 Old 06-27-2018, 08:44 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,906
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1993 Post(s)
Liked: 1896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuieve View Post
Pretty much. I tried original Oculus for a few weeks, hated it. The screen door was simply terrible. Not even looking at another VR set until we have 8k and some serious FOV like 150 deg or something. Don't want to see borders.

I'm actually only interested in VR for movies. Don't care about games and demos. But I would buy it for movies. Give me a 200" from like 12ft. with the actual screen within the vr theater having enough pixels to keep it at 4k and you have my money.
i'm certainly no expert in VR, so maybe there's a reason for this, but why the heck wouldn't they make these parameters user configurable? I'd think THAT might be the biggest selling feature of all. Being able to effortlessly move your 'big screen' around the room until it's the perfect viewing distance and size for the content and your tastes, would actually be something you CAN'T do in real life. heck, if prices came down, it might even be a cheap way to test out what you should buy.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #10 of 13 Old 06-27-2018, 08:52 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,906
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1993 Post(s)
Liked: 1896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuieve View Post
I personally don't need the actual VR thing, as in all that head movement inside...

All I want is a fixed HUGE screen in front of me in the helmet. Not VR. Just a "portable personal enormous home theater in a helmet".

I wonder if there's any market for that. Just take an Oculus, throw some 8k panels in it, but leave out all the VR stuff out, and just make it a movie player, simplify it. None of the nausea and requiring a mega computer drawbacks

If I can have a 200" screen in front of me while sitting on a toilet... oh man...
they tried this year's ago. i remember reading about it in sound and vision when i had a subscription, so it must have been lat 90's early 2000's. If I remember correctly, it was like an 80" screen, and i suspect it flopped due to poor resolution


question back for you guys, since you sound like you've tried a lot more VR than i have. is there really a difference between a simulate 'big screen' vs holding your phone a foot away from your eyes?

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #11 of 13 Old 06-27-2018, 10:45 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
HeadRusch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 10,378
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 233 Post(s)
Liked: 169
Sony HMZ-T1, Cinemizer 1909, Cinego, Accupics.

Four names I just pulled from products on Amazon, check them out they may serve your needs. I think Fierce is thinking also of a Sony device that looked pretty futuristic, but from the late ought's...640x480 resolution per eye, personal screen.....looked like 90's scifi goggles at the time, low profile things that didn't catch on, there was no 3D or anything in them, just optics to make it appear like one screen was in front of your eyes.....and we all know how that turned out.


Xbox Live / PS3 / Steam: HeadRusch1
Keeping the world safe from the evil antics of Bernie Tanaka and Mel Fujitsu since 1986

HeadRusch is online now  
post #12 of 13 Old 11-07-2018, 08:30 AM
Advanced Member
 
RROSEN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 805
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch View Post
Supposedly the reason the Rift and Vive have the FOV's they have today, and why we are not seeing major advances in FOV's inside VR headsets coming out today by any great margin, is because there's a real problem with Motion Sickness when you expand the FOV inside a headset..as in you can't even stand, you topple over at the slightest movement, something the "restricted" FOV of current HMD's address by simply giving us a little bit of that "helmet" effect.

There was a story recently on the web about the US military testing more tech, and one of the stories was they are testing windowless vehicles, supplemented by arrays of 360 degree cameras. They mentioned in passing that one of the biggest problems driving this way (using cameras to cover an array of screens, or using an augmented reality headset or VR to see via the camera systems) is motion sickness for the drivers. We have some ways to go before we solve the brain/motion equation in VR and, it seems, in AR as well. Remember, these guys are inside the vehicle and feeling the motion...there is still a disconnect using the augmented or virtual camera screens, it seems.

As for the limitations of the current generation of hardware, the Rift is the most unique game experiences I've had in my life, and with every new game release I have a new experience. For someone like me, this is priceless stuff. But that's me, and I get why people want to wait for 'better specs'. Thing is, I'm not sure those better specs are coming soon.
Higher Rez is a nice to have, but requires GPU's capable of delivering. I don't want dual 4K panels....and running games that look like 2008 mobile titles cuz that's all the GPU's can push at that time. I think they are probably waiting for GPU's to catch up AND come down in price where resolution is concerned, but that FOV problem I think is harder to solve for.
We'll see.
I would have to agree with you. I also have the Oculus Rift and it's spectacular. I use it for gaming, but it's so immersive it's almost freaky.

I have never experienced anything like it. I am definitely hooked.

As for the field of View thing, I think there is at least one that has 210 degress. As for the people with motions sickness I would say make the Field of View as broad as possible and include a way to window it as needed for each person. Must be easy to have "shutters" you could adjust on the side

https://virtualrealitytimes.com/2017...w-vr-headsets/
RROSEN is offline  
post #13 of 13 Old 11-07-2018, 08:30 AM
Advanced Member
 
RROSEN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 805
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch View Post
Supposedly the reason the Rift and Vive have the FOV's they have today, and why we are not seeing major advances in FOV's inside VR headsets coming out today by any great margin, is because there's a real problem with Motion Sickness when you expand the FOV inside a headset..as in you can't even stand, you topple over at the slightest movement, something the "restricted" FOV of current HMD's address by simply giving us a little bit of that "helmet" effect.

There was a story recently on the web about the US military testing more tech, and one of the stories was they are testing windowless vehicles, supplemented by arrays of 360 degree cameras. They mentioned in passing that one of the biggest problems driving this way (using cameras to cover an array of screens, or using an augmented reality headset or VR to see via the camera systems) is motion sickness for the drivers. We have some ways to go before we solve the brain/motion equation in VR and, it seems, in AR as well. Remember, these guys are inside the vehicle and feeling the motion...there is still a disconnect using the augmented or virtual camera screens, it seems.

As for the limitations of the current generation of hardware, the Rift is the most unique game experiences I've had in my life, and with every new game release I have a new experience. For someone like me, this is priceless stuff. But that's me, and I get why people want to wait for 'better specs'. Thing is, I'm not sure those better specs are coming soon.
Higher Rez is a nice to have, but requires GPU's capable of delivering. I don't want dual 4K panels....and running games that look like 2008 mobile titles cuz that's all the GPU's can push at that time. I think they are probably waiting for GPU's to catch up AND come down in price where resolution is concerned, but that FOV problem I think is harder to solve for.
We'll see.
I would have to agree with you. I also have the Oculus Rift and it's spectacular. I use it for gaming, but it's so immersive it's almost freaky.

I have never experienced anything like it. I am definitely hooked.

As for the field of View thing, I think there is at least one that has 210 degress. As for the people with motions sickness I would say make the Field of View as broad as possible and include a way to window it as needed for each person. Must be easy to have "shutters" you could adjust on the side

https://virtualrealitytimes.com/2017...w-vr-headsets/
RROSEN is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Virtual Reality (VR) & Augmented Reality (AR)

Tags
oculus go , oculus tv , virtual reality

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off