Rift S Discontinued

Here is the not surprising but annoying news: https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2020/9/16/21422717/facebook-oculus-rift-s-discontinued-quest-2-vr-connect

Of course. 7 months after I finally buy into VR and they pull this. The writing has really been on the wall the entire time though. Constant updates to the quest while the Rift S continues to be the ugly red headed stepchild.

It’s too bad, I like the rift S. Reasonably priced and ok resolution made it worthwhile to anyone who liked sims but didn’t want to spend $1000 on a headset.

Modules: A10C, F5, F14, F16, F18, F86, AV8B, UH1, Mi8, Ka50, FC3, Supercarrier, CA, P47, P51

Well, the original Quest is discontinued as well. I mean, those will still work just fine in the future I guess, just like the CV1 still does.

There will be plenty of used ones.

I am currently using a Rift S. I had purchased an Oculus CV1 which I chose after trying both it and the Vive. Matt Wagner's review convinced me the Rift S would make VR much better with DCS World, and it did. But the Rift S took a few steps backwards from the CV1, most notably in the area of audio. The earphones on the CV1 are far superior in quality and volume to the Rift S. My Rift S has a defective mic as well. Never had a problem with the CV1's mic. The image quality on the Rift S is much better than the CV1 with a small cost: 40 fps instead of 45 fps in DCS World.

With the CV1, the cockpits were just too blurry. I flew TrackIR about 50% of the time because the quality of the CV1 was just too low. With the Rift S, I fly VR 80% or more of the time.

But Facebook/Oculus has failed to advance in the area of PC VR. I have an HP Reverb G2 on the way. If I build a new PC and get a top notch GPU to go with it, I expect the G2 to render the Rift S an obsolete dust collector in the same way the Rift S did to the CV1.

For the time being, the Rift S is still getting the job done. But having to wear an audio headset over the Rift S annoys me more and more knowing that I should not have had to do that to get decent audio and a reliable mic.

There were two possibilities really.

1) New Rift to be announced, aka CV2 that would be top model to challenge others and Quest to be their affordable model for masses.

2) Rift to be discontinued and Quest to become only model, because lack of updates it was expected.

The third option, very unlikely would have been that Rift S receives major updates with the announcement of Quest 2.

I was hoping the third option, really did only want to see hand tracking added to it. It would have pushed Rift S one year forward....

But the first option was a fear that came true.

I don't have Facebook account, totally dislike it. So that makes question to continue on Quest 2 after Rift S. As well the Quest 2 audio system is killing it to me. I fixed the audio in Rift S but dislike idea of bad audio built-in.

I love the idea to just have one cable from PC to play DCS and few other.... But what truly killed VR oculus for me is the second generation touch controllers. Really, the tracking ring positioned upwards renders most/all shooting games useless as the controller hits continually the HMD and tracking is lost often when close to HMD.

To my opinion the Rift line should have continued somehow.

At least the support in development for next 18-24 months.

IMHO Facebook made decisions that are 80% bad and 20% good.

But what one can do when they lose one old customer and gain two new? Business as usually, for masses....

There were two possibilities really.

 

1) New Rift to be announced, aka CV2 that would be top model to challenge others and Quest to be their affordable model for masses.

 

2) Rift to be discontinued and Quest to become only model, because lack of updates it was expected.

 

The third option, very unlikely would have been that Rift S receives major updates with the announcement of Quest 2.

 

I was hoping the third option, really did only want to see hand tracking added to it. It would have pushed Rift S one year forward....

 

But the first option was a fear that came true.

 

I don't have Facebook account, totally dislike it. So that makes question to continue on Quest 2 after Rift S. As well the Quest 2 audio system is killing it to me. I fixed the audio in Rift S but dislike idea of bad audio built-in.

 

I love the idea to just have one cable from PC to play DCS and few other.... But what truly killed VR oculus for me is the second generation touch controllers. Really, the tracking ring positioned upwards renders most/all shooting games useless as the controller hits continually the HMD and tracking is lost often when close to HMD.

 

To my opinion the Rift line should have continued somehow.

At least the support in development for next 18-24 months.

 

IMHO Facebook made decisions that are 80% bad and 20% good.

But what one can do when they lose one old customer and gain two new? Business as usually, for masses....

I have found the Touch Controllers tracking to be exceptional.

Played all the way through Half Life Alyx with it with no issues at all.

That is one area I believe Oculus shines in.

However I will be moving to the Reverb G2 rather than a Quest 2. I just hope controller tracking in it is at least close to that of Touch.

I have found the Touch Controllers tracking to be exceptional.

Played all the way through Half Life Alyx with it with no issues at all.

That is one area I believe Oculus shines in.

 

However I will be moving to the Reverb G2 rather than a Quest 2. I just hope controller tracking in it is at least close to that of Touch.

I wish controller tracking was done in another way, allowing different brands to make their own devices to be used with the existing headset tracking infrastructure. I love my oculus touch controllers, but they are pretty much useless when flying or racing. They are way too ergonomic. I'd rather have something like a wristband or perhaps something like a pair of gloves.

I wish controller tracking was done in another way, allowing different brands to make their own devices to be used with the existing headset tracking infrastructure. I love my oculus touch controllers, but they are pretty much useless when flying or racing. They are way too ergonomic. I'd rather have something like a wristband or perhaps something like a pair of gloves.

Or, or, or....PointCTRL system made by a DCS'er. It's in the main INPUT/OUTPUT thread. Check it out.

Or, or, or....PointCTRL system made by a DCS'er. It's in the main INPUT/OUTPUT thread. Check it out.

I saw it, it's definitely nice. But that's not exactly what I'm talking about. There is already a tracking infrastructure here. With my CV1, came 2 tracking cameras and I purchased one extra, which makes it 3 for 360 degrees room scale coverage. Yet, to be able to have any sort of hand controllers' tracking I need yet another tracking infrastructure because the touch controls can't be used simultaneously with HOTAS. Another tracking infrastructure means more $$$ on an already expensive system.

What I wish is to have the tracking code being made open source, so anyone or any company can design and sell their own controllers that use the existing provided tracking infrastructure. It could be for example, logitech gloves compatible with oculus tracking constellation, or..

I saw it, it's definitely nice. But that's not exactly what I'm talking about. There is already a tracking infrastructure here. With my CV1, came 2 tracking cameras and I purchased one extra, which makes it 3 for 360 degrees room scale coverage. Yet, to be able to have any sort of hand controllers' tracking I need yet another tracking infrastructure because the touch controls can't be used simultaneously with HOTAS. Another tracking infrastructure means more $$$ on an already expensive system.

 

 

What I wish is to have the tracking code being made open source, so anyone or any company can design and sell their own controllers that use the existing provided tracking infrastructure. It could be for example, logitech gloves compatible with oculus tracking constellation, or..

I got you. The most immediate problem is that that there is no standard. So unless the industry adopts one (which they won't, I don't think) we're SOL on that front.

Maybe when true haptic feedback gloves are mainstream and you can't tell whether you're holding a real HOTAS or not, then maybe the industry will standardize.

If oculus would have opened tracking ABI, allowing to program basically any IR LED pattern to their system cia their own software, they would have ruled the market for extra trackers. Like, make a ring with IR leds and show it to system, move it around specific pattern and positions etc so that system can learn it and adapt to it, it would allow many things.

I expected to see that from OpenVR but not really happening...

The answer is Quest 2. With Quest 1 there is the issue of video bandwidth it can handle over the link - 150 Mbps, which is pretty low. Soon after the launch of Quest 2 this limitation will be all but gone and there will be no reason to keep Rift S alive as it will be inferior in almost every aspect, even when linked to a PC.

Rift S: 1280 x 1440 per eye, 80 Hz

Quest 2: 1832 x 1920 per eye, 90 Hz

As noted before, the PC link picture shouldn't have any noticeable compression distortion as now there is enough punch to decompress (XR2 chip...) and the link cable has been fiber optic (plus copper for power) all along.

If oculus would have opened tracking ABI, allowing to program basically any IR LED pattern to their system cia their own software, they would have ruled the market for extra trackers. Like, make a ring with IR leds and show it to system, move it around specific pattern and positions etc so that system can learn it and adapt to it, it would allow many things.

 

I expected to see that from OpenVR but not really happening...

Exactly. I read about it some time ago. The system is incredibly well made. The oculus tracking constellation not only tracks you via leds, but also with in-built gyro sensors and its all connected via bluetooth. All that, encased in a small cylinder.

The answer is Quest 2. With Quest 1 there is the issue of video bandwidth it can handle over the link - 150 Mbps, which is pretty low. Soon after the launch of Quest 2 this limitation will be all but gone and there will be no reason to keep Rift S alive as it will be inferior in almost every aspect, even when linked to a PC.

Rift S: 1280 x 1440 per eye, 80 Hz

Quest 2: 1832 x 1920 per eye, 90 Hz

As noted before, the PC link picture shouldn't have any noticeable compression distortion as now there is enough punch to decompress (XR2 chip...) and the link cable has been fiber optic (plus copper for power) all along.

That's good news, but how about native hand tracking. AFAIR, it's development was put on hold.

That's good news, but how about native hand tracking. AFAIR, it's development was put on hold.

It's alive and well

:)

It's alive and well

:)

On RIFT S.....

RIP-S is dead from now and onto the future.

No more updates from facebook.

It´s an all-in bet into all in one headsets.

It's alive and well

:)

Nice. Is it supported in DCS?

Nice. Is it supported in DCS?

Nope... At least for now.

On RIFT S.....

Oculus was still suggesting that the RIFT S may eventually get this.

But their total focus on stand alone headsets for the past year tells me otherwise.

I have a Rift s and had a CV1 previously. Quest 2 should be good, but if you add the link cable and the additional battery you pay the same amount of money than a reverb g2. I plan to upgrade to 3080 (or 3070, or big navi, I'll wait and see) but - given the above - maybe a reverb g2 is a better choice if the main focus is DCS: I do not need an internal memory or an embedded CPU if I do not play oculus games (I have some of them but have used rarely just to try, I mainly use VR for flight sims). I'm quite sure reverb g2 tracking will be worst than oculus one (4 cameras instead of 5), but I play DCS with the mouse (no controllers) and for the tracking of the head alone reverb g2 will be more than enough.

I have a Rift s and had a CV1 previously. Quest 2 should be good, but if you add the link cable and the additional battery you pay the same amount of money than a reverb g2. I plan to upgrade to 3080 (or 3070, or big navi, I'll wait and see) but - given the above - maybe a reverb g2 is a better choice if the main focus is DCS: I do not need an internal memory or an embedded CPU if I do not play oculus games (I have some of them but have used rarely just to try, I mainly use VR for flight sims). I'm quite sure reverb g2 tracking will be worst than oculus one (4 cameras instead of 5), but I play DCS with the mouse (no controllers) and for the tracking of the head alone reverb g2 will be more than enough.

Yeah if your main focus is flight sims, Reverb G2 would be the way to go IMHO.

Plus no Facebook requirement.

For me what it would come down to is if you can tell the difference between directly connected and Oculus link.

I know I'm a huge nerd, and is trying to reduce my nearly insane hatred for artefacting.

I can see the compression artefacting in direct feed HDMI and displayport cables even.

I can get over it, at first ASW was nearly inducing physical pain, now I don't really care.

If Facebook would have been able to promise full resolution and full framrate on quest 2.

I'd quite likely get that.

General VR considered, there is no doubt a standalone unit like the quest or quest 2 is the far more likely to see widespread adoption.

I still might get a quest 2 later for what that offer.

But I and us here aren't really a general use case. I do however suspect or even expect that the quest 2 with fully employed link can offer even a better pc vr experience than the Rift-s.

But for now, even though nothing should go bad with the S I currently use I have a pre-order in for a g2.

Problem is, now I have to scrounge up the funds for a 3080...

And as for price difference, after getting the Elite strap, case and link cable, all almost considered must haves the price difference between a quest 2 kit and a g2 is barely $150

I do however suspect or even expect that the quest 2 with fully employed link can offer even a better pc vr experience than the Rift-s.

That's for sure; also the slightly lower resolution vs reverb g2 could give better fps for an almost unnoticeable difference in visual quality. That's the only reason I'm still undecided.