Speaking at GDC 2017, Jason Rubin described VR wireless technology as “compressed, not perfect, and expensive” and “the wrong direction for right now”. Rubin’s task at Oculus is to deliver compelling VR content, and believes that hardware features such as wireless, while desirable, simply add to the cost of a product that is already considered too expensive.

As Oculus’ VP of Content, Jason Rubin’s priorities are steered towards delivering a strong software lineup, but he offered some thoughts about emerging VR hardware technologies when speaking to PCGamesN at GDC 2017. Following the positive reaction to low-latency wireless accessories like KwikVR and TPCAST, and influential figures like Gabe Newell suggesting that PC VR headsets will have integrated solutions in 2018, the expectation for wireless high-end VR is rising.

However, it adds a significant cost to products that are already considered very expensive for mainstream adoption, and Rubin believes it is currently the wrong move. “If we add wireless, but it adds $200 to the price of the headset, I think we’re moving in the wrong direction for right now. Some may want it, so as a peripheral it’s interesting, but I don’t think it should be our focus right now, I think our focus should be on bringing the core experience we have down in cost before we add features.”

The transmission module of the TPCAST accessory seen sporting HDMI and USB ports
The transmission module of the TPCAST accessory seen sporting HDMI and USB ports

Rubin is being realistic. The hardware needs to improve, but it has to become more affordable as well, and ultimately appeal equally to the mainstream consumer and the enthusiast. In any case, it will remain a matter of tradeoffs. The existing wireless solutions are close to the limit of bandwidth to stream current resolutions at 90Hz, and increasing resolution and FOV is the main expectation for the next generation of VR HMDs. “They’re getting it, not to say it doesn’t work, but it’s compressed, it’s not perfect and it’s expensive”, he says. “If we go wireless and then we decide we’re going to increase the resolution of the screens, now all of a sudden we may have to go back to a wire.”

TPCAST Wireless VR Add-On Available Worldwide Q2 for $249

It’s clear that Rubin is discussing the short term here. Wireless is the future, and Oculus’ own Chief Scientist Michael Abrash laid down some impressive predictions of where the hardware could be in five years, which include a wireless solution supporting 4Kx4K displays per eye. Valve are certainly not afraid of pushing the hardware at a high price. Speaking at a recent press event, Gabe Newell described the Vive, which is the most expensive VR device on the market, as “barely capable of doing a marginally adequate job of delivering a VR experience”, and believes major hardware improvements are required to make VR compelling enough for the mainstream, warning that high-end systems will remain very expensive.

IMR are Building a Wireless Video System to Power 4k Per-Eye VR Headsets

While it may appear that Valve and Oculus have different priorities here, it’s all a matter of interpretation. Both companies are heavily invested in delivering content and developing future VR hardware solutions – it just depends on who you talk to, and what timescale they’re prepared to talk about. Right now, Rubin’s message is clear. “The two things we think are most important in pushing PC VR forward right now are better and better content and better and better price”.

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. See here for more information.

  • TenshiSama

    So no wireless for Rift anytime soon I take it?

    Also, TPCAST is uncompressed. Not sure what he’s talking about.

    • Justos

      No first party solutions at least. Same for vive no?

      • veritas

        Not quite. TPcast is a company invested by HTC and is part of its X-Acclerator Program.

        HTC is also partnered with Intel to make a wireless solution for Vive.

    • Andrew Jakobs

      Uncompressed? think again..

    • JustNiz

      From severl things I read I believe TPcast actually is compressed. Just not sure how lossily compressed it is. 60Ghz gives them A LOT of bandwidth so hopefully not too much if at all.

      There’s also another “solution” coming (can’t remember its name) that uses your existing 2.4ghz WiFi. I can friking guaratee with that little bandwitdh it will have to be so lossily compressed that the image will inevitably look terrible. Also by going over TCP/IP on a shared connection It will unavidably be VERY laggy in comparison to TPcast. It will also turn into a vomit comet every time your wife/kids start watching a facetube video on their wifi-connected phone/laptop.

    • Joan Villora Jofré

      Is compressed. All of them are compressed.

  • Ian Shook

    I don’t agree with Jason Rubin at all. Wireless on the Vive and Rift is totally optional and it’s specific to the current headsets, as the next round might be wireless out of the box. Why on earth would he say it’s not a good thing to have when it’s optional? And I also disagree when he says lower cost should be the main goal. Getting it right should be the goal, and then bring cost down after that. Otherwise you end up with a world full of cardboards and GearVRs and that just isn’t VR. There’s a reason some things are expensive. They’re new technology, they’re the best in class, and there’s a market for that. The price always come down by itself later on.

  • PK

    oculus also thought room-scale was the wrong direction for now. at this point i have almost zero interest for sit-down vr and wireless would be a huge blessing. i care more about having a quality experience than a larger user base, although when my friends try my vive they almost always start seriously asking about the possibility of buying one. despite the price and the space needed, it’s just better and it thrills people. it may not be the right direction for his company but jason shouldn’t go out on a limb and speak for the hundreds of thousands of us that would probably pay more than 200 for a wireless option.

    • M0rdresh

      Indeed, I can imagine for a company that still marks room scale as an experimental feature (try ordering an extra sensor it shows such disclaimer) and nails you to the desk, wireless is no priority.

      • Kalle

        Nice that ppl can read :) He says their goal right now is a strong software lineup. Which I agree is more important. Wireless is nice, but without any good software it’s useless.

        • M0rdresh

          He said more than that, nice that people do selective reading ;)
          Of course games are the most important thing, but it’s not a ‘or they go games or they go wireless’ thing. He should stick to his guns, being head of content, and leave technology up to engineers within Oculus to comment on, those people sing a different tune on that particular subject mind you.

          • Kalle

            Is that the best reply you could come up with ?

            Edit: well now the reply is a little better, thank you for editing it ;)
            And, btw I never ever wrote that he didn’t say more in the whole interview. So I dunno why you even mention that. :)

          • M0rdresh

            I never ever claimed that Jason Rubin did not say their goal is strong software. So I don’t know why you even mentioning, no you insulting, my reading skills? Leave such remarks out of your replies, they are not warranted because you have a different conclusion on the interview.

          • Kalle

            You made yourself funny due to that they are not ready to support 360 fully yet, and had that as a cause for no wireless. Since that’s NOT what’s in the article, I answered with a comic remark regarding your reading. It was more meant as a joke (therefore the smiley).

            Now you’re talking about insults when you are so keen on dashing them out yourself with “selective reading”. So you’re doing the exact same insult, then you nag about me. :) Kinda funny.

          • M0rdresh

            What? I said for a company that is still amidst fully supporting room scale, it still labeled experimental on the store by Oculus, I can realize that the hurdles of cables – which truly become apparent walking in the room – and thus wireless is no priority for them. That is far from funny or incorrect and intact very logical.

            Now Jason Rubin may not admit to this or openly state in the interview, my opinion in the matter does not constitute being unable to read thank you.

            Furthermore, my redirect was merely a reaction upon your action. Think twice next time before casting the first stone if you’re not willing to accept that people are going to respond with equal coin.

    • JustNiz

      I’m with you. I can’t wait to get my hands on a TPcast.
      Oculus keep finding new ways to show how they really don’t understand the VR market, and Valve/HTC keep finding new ways to show that they really do.

      • yag

        Oculus are pretty logical with themselves, their goal is to bring VR to the masses (with better content and lower prices), not to satisfy a small niche like us by making the best HMD possible… It’s a bummer for me but I understand that.

        • JustNiz

          >> their goal is to bring VR to the masses
          If that’s true then just the fact that Vive is actually very much outselling Rift shows Oculus have this wrong too, and that the “mass market” for PCVR (if there is such a thing) is just as OK with $799 pricing.

          • Kalle

            please get of your high horse. So they can’t have a goal just because they are second?

          • yag

            The first wave of headsets are bought by us, the enthusiasts, not the “masses”. Don’t forget our situation is not the norm.

          • Kaleo Kripton

            Show the source plz

          • SomeGuyorAnother

            Vive is outselling because Roomscale is their biggest selling point, which is definitely a promising thing for people. But it’s also severely underutilized and currently not too impressive. Most things in roomscale can be accomplished in non-roomscale, since much of the user base has realized they don’t get simulation sickness as easily as the horror stories have shared.

            You say it’s “OK with the $799 pricing”, despite the fact they -just- lowered the price for Rift. There’s no data to go on, yet, on whether this will boost sales or not. PSVR is selling very well, beating both PCVR HMDs, and it currently sits closer to the Oculus in price.

            Oculus’ slower approach to Roomscale may dissapoint alot of people, but in its current state as of the 1.12 update along with the quality games released has made the wait worth while.

          • JustNiz

            >> But it’s also severely underutilized and currently not too impressive.

            You sound like a Rift owner so I’m going to presume you’re actually basing your comments on the Rift doing roomscale. In which case, fair enough. I can accept it probably isn’t too impressive, because the Rift wasn’t ever intended to do roomscale, so roomscale on it is a hack at best.

            if you are actually talking about roomscale on the Vive then yours is one of the most badly uninformed statements I’ve ever read here.

          • SomeGuyorAnother

            I am a Rift owner, but if you assume Rift’s roomscale is a “hack”, then I’d avoid calling me uninformed. The reference wasn’t into the ability of the headset to do roomscale, but to how developers have been using it. It’s neat, but after the initial period it just…is. With standard locomotion, a simple finger swipe could manage. You -might- be assuming I’m talking about 360 movement, which is not what’s meant by roomscale, it’s simply included. No, I mean being able to walk around the room. The ability to crouch down to inspect something is probably the only inclusion into the usefulness of roomscale. All of this I can manage on the Rift, and have been able to for months.

            Keep in mind, the 3-camera setup for Oculus current performs roomscale perfectly for a 10ft x 10ft area, which is still larger than your average user can manage. Vive is capable of larger space, but again, this doesn’t cover your average user. Rift is more than capable, it just wasn’t their focus from the beginning. Their technical glitches at release didn’t help this perception, but those have been ironed out in short order. Vive had its share of issues at release, as well.

    • Sam Illingworth

      I don’t think he is “going out on a limb and speak for the hundreds of thousands of us that would probably pay more than 200 for a wireless option”, he’s talking about what he thinks will make VR more maintstream.

      I certainly want a TPCast (although the price is putting me off), but we RoadToVR readers are a pretty niche bunch.

      • Mark Lapasa

        To be honest, the real mainstream VR is mobile. It has and will be the metric for most VR HMD’s sold.

        Desktop peeps will be the niche/upper echelon of the VR experience. If they were willing to spend $XXX on a Rift or Vive, another $YYY to make the experience better would be a fraction of the cost.

        However I do agree with Rubin that they would be shooting themselves in the foot as the benefits would only be short-term for wireless.

        • vijay kumar

          ”Desktop peeps will be the niche/upper echelon of the VR experience”


          ”However I do agree with Rubin that they would be shooting themselves in the foot as the benefits would only be short-term for wireless.”

          I am assuming you mean benefit to the people. Then you are wrong. Mobile CPU’s esp like the SD835 were developed from the ground up for VR too. Also mobile GPU’s these days. Google’s fuchsia OS (that will take the place of android in the future) has an advanced renderer and it will also be more suitable for VR, google’s seurat tech can make VR more photo realistic using just mobile graphics.

          Sure mobile VR is not as good as desktop VR, and it will never be….but most people havent seen desktop VR, so they wouldnt know that mobile VR is not as good as desktop VR. So for them mobile VR is ‘good enough’.

          And mobile VR is getting better every year….

      • PK

        I think he’s a bit overconfident in that what’s best for Oculus, who weren’t expected there to be a room-scale market so soon and are perfectly fine without cords, is best for VR at large. I don’t like anyone pretending to be such an authority as to what is best for getting us to the place I and many others want. Oculus used to say the experience has to be great, a certain level of experience rather than just cheap, they believe they’re at that level now I guess but I don’t agree. I’ve literally sold over a dozen vives for HTC based on my demos and probably a hundred more people are considering it at some point in the near future. More would consider it if the cord was missing. But having a more limited, quality VR company is a great option too, for those more interested in playing these sorts of games.

  • Daemon Hunt

    This is a classic Oculus smokescreen. In light of the recent price drop of the default Oculus front-facing solution, wireless is certainly only an optional accessory, whereas those of us paying a premium for true roomscale will thrive on wireless as a godsend. The ol’ quantity vs quality argument. It’s simple, and I’ve said this before: we choose with our wallets. As a developer, I choose to invest in the future. Consumers will pay for what they can afford.

    • RFC_VR

      Yes wireless would have been ideal today, I pushed lighthouse tracking out in a 4.5m x 3.4m space to see what happens. Installing the 25m link cable tomorrow to see how much further it can really cover. Bear in mind my lab is industrial premises with unfurnished spaces so no reflection or occulsion. Would love to test the wireless solution to ditch the tether, but then what range would wireless have?

  • Xron

    He means that if they add wireles in their bundle the price will go up by 200$+
    When even now price is way too high for most people.
    Btw they reduced price by 200$ today, its really welcome.
    As he said before, first we need to make the price compeling for general public, then start adding new features.
    Though for me it would be nice to have some better specs vive or oculus. Lg hmd was shown today that has 1440.1280 res per eye, thats ~40% more pixel density than oculus or vive have.
    Hope to see new Hmd from oculus and vive next year, and having them at 1k$, with wireless solution would help US… but not to general public.

    • yag

      Agreed, too much enthusiasts are thinking they are the norm. Normal people don’t care about wires, they just think VR on PC is too expensive for now.

  • Robospeed

    Isn’t Rubin’s notion of bringing the cost down for the average consumer what the Samsung Gear is (or Daydream or even Cardboard)? All are wireless, all are low priced. None have become a major hit (yet) beyond novelty and early adopters.

    • Andrew Jakobs

      well, that’s because it’s the first gen mobile ‘vr’ sets.. The next generation (coming this year) will be better again.

      • OgreTactics

        Apparently not, have you seen that GearVR crap? Let’s not hope it’s not really what Samsung has to announce late March…

    • user

      cardboard with 30 apps over a million downloads is not a hit compared to the rest?

      • Robospeed

        Not when the majority of those Cardboard were giveaways, and repeat usage is almost nil. Cardboard for all intents and purposes, was/is a demo.

        • user

          so google search also isnt a hit because its free? and youre not telling me that you have insight in the usage stats of cardboard apps?

          • lovethetech

            Cardboard APPs are waste and viewboards of 80s with over saturated colors. . It will Pull down the VR dream to garbage level.
            Samsung want to take advantage of their smartphone market share.

            Even the high end desktops are having tough time creating/rendering VRs.

          • user

            i know. and when you watch videos of google’s expeditions program, the kids are professional actors and not really amazed.

  • Mr. New Vegas

    Ill take higher resolution and sit down VR than wireless and roomscale.
    I dont want to play standing Up, I dont want to move, Im Ok with CHAIR enabled movement, anything I can do without standing up is great.

    • Daemon Hunt

      Good for you bro

    • TheVillasurfer

      Tethered room scale is great with the rift anyway, but yes some seated experiences are some of my favourites.

      • JustNiz

        > Tethered room scale is great with the rift anyway

        For sure its better than just being stuck in a chair. Not sure I could live with the relatively small maximum size play area of the Rift, the need for 3 cameras (along with their USB cables) round your area if you want the best experience. I also found that Rift tracking in roomscale lags/drops out a lot more than Vive does.

        • yag

          But with a large size play area, are you not annoyed by the cable ? What is the max size actually with the Vive ?
          (for my part – with the Rift – I found than 2 cameras is enough for my modest 8’x8′ area, the important thing is to place them high and pointing toward the floor)

        • TheVillasurfer

          I use x2 sensors corner-corner and I don’t have issues. There’s a lot of BS written about using Rifts with x2 sensors. I don’t have a room large enough to go beyond what I use anyway, and I’m using a large room :) I’ve used x3 sensors but found that I actually had no need to as it made no difference.

          • JustNiz

            How big is your play area?

          • TheVillasurfer

            My pc isn’t ideally positioned, but the 2 sensors must be about 3 metres from each other. I think that’s roughly the maximum recommended but not sure.

    • JustNiz

      Have you actually tried roomscale on a Vive? It doesn’t sound like it.

      • Mr. New Vegas

        Jumping like a ‘tard is not enjoyable, I dont want to play STANDING UP.
        If you want to know why VR is not picking up steam, thats because casuals see VR demos on TV and they see people standing up with guns and they assume that VR means gaming while you stand up: MOST people HATE IT.
        How many people want to come back from work just to stand up for 2 hours?
        It might be good as some sort of experience but not every day gaming, every day gaming has to be seated.

        • JustNiz

          Speak for yourself, I think you’re totally missing out if you can’t/don’t do roomscale. And no, roomscale doesn’t require you to “Jump like a tard”. Saying shit like that just makes you sound like a whiney butthurt Oculus fanboi.
          >> How many people want to come back from work just to stand up for 2 hours?
          Me for one. At work I’m sat a desk all frikkin day. I NEED to get up and move when I’m done at work. There’s also plenty of stories on Reddit/Vive from overweight people that don’t enjoy going to the gym, that are really happy because they’re finding that playing Audioshield and other such games regularly is a fun and effective way of dropping pounds and getting fit.

          • Mr. New Vegas

            You are talking about Minority.
            Yes roomscale HAS a wow factor, especially for the first time, but thats not what most gamers want, very few want to stand up during gameplay.
            Standing up is good for some experience but it wont do for proper AAA games.
            RE7 currently is the only AAA VR game, it has none of that and it was played by 154K people (almost 10% of all RE7s across all platforms ).
            PSVR sold 960K units in 6 months, thats more that vive/rift combined and than multiplayed by 2 or even 3 and it has none of that.

            Roomscale has its place but its shouldn’t be the main topic of discussion, its not be all of VR.


          • JustNiz

            Sorry but I just won’t ever agree with your opinion that seated is the best or in any sense more “proper” VR experience than roomscale. Furthermore nothing you could say could convince me more than the first-hand experience from actually using my Vive.
            Take a look at all the commercial VR experiences/arcades popping up such as Immersion arcade, The Void, and the Ghostbusters experience at Madame Tussauds. They’re all roomscale (and then some) even though seated would have worked out much cheaper to do. What does that tell you about which VR format (seated or roomscale) most people think is more fun, even enough to bet $millions of venture capital on?

          • Mr. New Vegas

            You cant expect people to game standing up every day for 3-5 hours?!

            I never said its better, I said that its what most people want for their HOME GAMING use to REPLACE regular gaming.
            No one said you cant have both but roomscale shouldn’t be pushed as epitome of VR it only scares developers away.

            Arcades and Roomscales are ALL experiences, they are Timed events, like going to arcades they are not couch gaming, couch gaming for hours is well on the COUCH!

            Im talking about ACTUAL gaming, when you sit for hours every day and play games, something you might NOT need a monitor at all in future when VR HMDS will have so sigh resolution that they will do fine to replace monitors even for 2D games, old non VR games, non 3D movies, Desktop etc.

            P.S. Millions of dollars or not but gamers prefer PSVR by a huge margin, because PSVR advertised from day as COUCH VR, you can actually game for hours.

          • JustNiz

            >> You cant expect people to game standing up every day for 3-5 hours?!
            I doubt whether most people actually do game every day for 3-5 hours, but even if they did, why not? Many if not most people also bike, hike and shop for that long or longer.

            I just finished The Solus Project after about about 35 hours (roomscale) gameplay, over maybe 8 days. The comfort of standing up/walking around for that long didn’t even cross my mind, and I’m not particularly fit, but being European I’m also not a typical fat American couch sloth either. Perhaps if you also did some room scale, you would get more fit and healthy so also wouldn’t feel so uncomfortable from just standing up/waliking around for a couple of hours.

            >> gamers prefer PSVR by a huge margin,
            I’m fairly sure thats more down to the fact they already have a PS4 and can afford PSVR, than an actual “prefer the experience” thing over a higher quality headset with full tracking. Besides all of the ads I’ve seen of people using PSVR are doing so standing up.

            I guess you can be a couch potato all you want but please don’t presume to try and tell me and others what we must actually prefer, like I’m really lying or something.

            As for your whole “ACTUAL gaming in the future” rant, thats a complete non-sequitur/diversion to the argument you are making.

          • yag

            Agreed, the reality is : a lot of players are lazy and/or tired because of their job, and a lot of players don’t have the space or don’t want to bother to make space.
            That’s why roomscale will always be a niche (of a niche) despite being a great experience.

  • Gregg Bond

    Oculus are in an unenviable position at the moment. On one side, they have Steam VR devices, which are providing parity on seated content, whilst also providing room scale VR which is arguably a more compelling experience. Then Sony with PSVR on the other, offering an excellent value for the average home user.

    Its going to be challenging for them to add large room scale, the cameras just cant cope with the space that SteamVR can, and there is no point going for the value option. This leaves them with innovation, which given they are the ones responsible for the VR Renaissance in the first place could lead to some excellent things to come, or they could refuse to offer the market what it wants, stagnate and die on the vine.

    • Nigerian Wizard
    • yag

      Room scale is already a niche of a niche (most players are lazy and/or don’t have the space). So large room scale…

  • TheVillasurfer

    Good to read this. I’m more than happy with a tethered device. It sounds like his priorities are sensible and realistic.

  • Andrew Jakobs

    “Gabe Newell described the Vive, which is the most expensive VR device on the market”
    Uhm sorry Gabe, but the Vive is the most expensive ‘lowend’ VR device on the market, there are way WAY more expensive VR devices on the market which have much better specs, but then we’re talkin at least 1 to 2 zero’s added to the vive..

    • user

      im sure newell doesnt know that. send him an email.

  • Joan Villora Jofré

    Just Envy. The Wire is the worst of virtual reality for me.

  • VR Geek

    Just about every casual consumer we show the ViVe too has an issue with the cord with many noting that they will wait for it to be wireless before jumping in. Jason’s comments seem out of touch with what people want. Oculus’s hardcore focus on content is great, but I really feel it is too early to be pumping out bigger games when no one really knows what even works great yet. We are still in the “experimental”, shorter experience phase and not having a large library of AAA games is ok. You cannot force it even if you wanted too. In fact, longer experiences for me are not even that desirable as VR gaming is more emotionally and physically exhausting than regular video games in a good way. I think Oculus is trying to replicate the current video game market in VR but that would be just as foolish as the video game industry trying to replicate the board game industries business model. Seems like the suites are leading the charge and not the geeks a Oculus. Fun to watch them burn through money like it is a shuttle launch. Oculus, you need to slow down and explore this space before you charge ahead blindly.

    • OgreTactics

      Not ONE of our client in my agency want to do anything with the Vive for that reason. 11 fucking cables are you kidding me?

    • Mario Baldi

      I was thinking the same before reading the article, but then I found myself agreeing with the guy.
      I mean, as he says, wireless makes the whole thing 200$ more expensive, while they are trying to put costs down. And if you can theoretically add wireless with a peripheral device, then you as a user have the choice to do so. Best of both worlds.

      Of course this is all short-term stuff… in 5 years the damn thing must be wireless vanilla :D

    • Kalle

      Without good content sales will go down and that’s good bye.

      Everything have it’s time. There’s a lot of companies out on the market now, we’ll see wireless soon enough. Could be best with an “addon” instead of included from start due to price. When Vive and Rift price was announce alot of ppl turned their back.

  • OgreTactics

    Jason Rubin should stick to what he does best which is game design and art direction.

    Wireless VR is NOT a direction or an upgrade, but an absolute non-sense when it’s missing from a -head mounted- display. Too me tethered headsets are no different to what non-sense VR was in the 90s, or what Palms are to iPhones…

    And talking about wireless compression when you have that low of a VR resolution and FOV…

    Also TPCast (amongst other solution) is here, AV1 is here, OpenVR supersampling is here, and there’s also an obvious solution to wireless beaming problems, there’s absolutely NO fucking excuse for VR to not already be wireless, so saying that in 2017 is egregious…

    • yag

      Well if the main objective of Oculus is to bring VR to the masses, he’s right, better content and better prices are priority.
      Of course, us hardcore VR fans won’t agree :)

      • OgreTactics

        I don’t agree at all. What they’re doing is further condemning VR to another failed fad. Us, hardcore VR fan may be oblivious to the truth of the consumer market, but I can guarantee you that almost NONE of the vast number of people including professionals that I had VR tried and were amazed actually converted this into a purchase even for their smartphone.

        People didn’t buy 3D TVs no matter what was advertised, not because of price, but because it conceptually makes no-sense to have a barely leveled 3D image in a flat, framed screen. They didn’t buy VR in the 90s because as AMAZING as it was back then, it simply was a technological non-sense due to limited technology, like Google Glasses (or any AR glasses for that matter) are now. They didn’t buy Wii U or Palm for lots of more very subtle reasons.

        So having a head-mounted device that has a cable is an absolute non-sense, especially when sufficiently satisfying option and technology, which are standard in every way from hardware to software, is unacceptable. (I like your Dr. Slump avatar btw).

        • yag

          Don’t forget our situation (us enthusiasts) is not the norm. Ask to normal people, they don’t care about wires, they just will say that VR on PC is way to expensive.

          • OgreTactics

            I can only speak through my marketing matrices but more importantly the many clients (brands, companies, institutions) surveyed: they rather pay 800$ for a GearVR system, as limited as it, or at most an Oculus, but NEVER did they want to have anything to with Vive, because unlike tech and engineer/dev enthusiast, that ugly design, fucktons of cables and lighthouse mounting is un-manageable for scalable distribution and event production.

          • Kalle

            Lucidfer: sadly we have no idea what’s been happening between htc/valve and oculus behind the close doors. It’s probably not so simple as most ppl tend to believe.

          • OgreTactics

            Yes we know. You are assuming something that has no ground in reality but you’ve been led to believe as “it must be true”. Nope, these are humans not aliens or illuminatis, with pretty basic governance and corporate structures using known technology/science and matrices, not magic. But of course you can only infer so much from their PR, interviews, decisions, leaks and products, yet it is enough to tell what their decisional mindset it.

        • Kalle

          Well for VR to be successful in the long run it needs more than us hardcore fans. Probably that’s what’s he is hinting on.

  • NooYawker

    WOW.. talk about wrong.

    • Mr. New Vegas

      He is 100% right, Higher resolution beats wireless.

    • yag

      Well I agree that better content (especially on steamVR) is more
      important than wireless. But we can do both and just have wireless as an

      • NooYawker

        I think it boils down to what’s important to you. Lots of people are willing to give up a little resolution for freedom of movement without wires. Some are not. Wired will always be better than wireless.

        • yag

          I was speaking about general public. They don’t care about wires but about content and prices (which are currently way too high for them).

  • fuyou2

    ‘Jason Rubin” You’re a retard!.. Oculus almost deserves the injuction from Zenimax. FB has enough cash to absorb the cost. I mean fuck oculus anyway their hardware is flawed, tracking dog shit, lenses dog shit. DK 2 had way better lenses than CV1, How the fuck can you have a VR system where you can’t turn around???

    • Ben

      I’m not quite sure what you mean about the lenses. I find the lenses in my rift to be better than my vive, and also haven’t had any problems with single camera 360 degree tracking. There are IR diodes on the triangular shaped structure on the back of the rift that it uses for tracking.

      • yag

        Don’t lost your time with Valve trolls, disqus offers you the option to block them.

  • RipVoid

    It seems like they gave up.

  • Sebastien Mathieu

    Yeah, Yeah, Yeah Jason… Just focus on fixing your tracking….

  • Skippy76

    Sure.. Wireless might be useless for the rift since it cant do proper room scale but for us non-lazy gamers.. $250 is a bargain to be able to move freely!

    • Kalle

      well, maybe it’s not as good as vive for roomscale as for now. But i’m using 2 sensors setup as you would setup lighthouses, and got 3.5m x 2.5m area where tracking is really good. Sadly I don’t have any more space, but if I would I guess another sensor would let me expand even more.

      btw, “non-lazy gamers”, grow up.

  • Peter Hansen

    I go with Gabe Newell on this matter. We are on the brink of a having an
    acceptable VR experience. If the next gen headsets don’t come wireless –
    and there already are players on the market developing 4k wireless
    solutions (look at IMR or DisplayLink) – then there is something
    seriously wrong.

    Btw., does it HAVE to be 4k per eye? 4k in total
    (i.e. 2k per eye) would already be a vast improvement! And it would
    likely be more compatible with the computing power we have at hand at
    the time the next gen HMDs come to market.

    PLUS: Not using a pentile matrix also helps (see PSVR).

    • SomeGuyorAnother

      I believe the reason 4k tends to be mentioned is because that’s when the screendoor effect becomes almost unnoticable, which is the barrier they want to breach. For it to truly go away, we may need to hit 8k, but that’s just dreaming.


    Today, Oculus lowered the price of Rift/Touch by $200. For those who want to INCREASE the price, by all means enjoy your wireless. Now add up the cost of a Vive, with deluxe head strap & wireless add-on peripheral.

  • JustNiz

    Yep I second that. I’ve been playing in a square with just under 4.5m per side with no problems, other than the damn headset cable being too short. Its definately a cool experience. I can’t wait for TPCast/wireless, that will be the icing on the cake.

    • RFC_VR

      I had 6.4m between base station and tracking beautifully with sync cable. Looking at another 3in1cable daisy chained, interesting to see any latency but with physical cabling should not be a real issue.

      Yesterday was first experience of roomscale plus and it was absolutely mind blowing. Abbot’s Book with no visible chaperone was stunning and frightening (in a good way) I realised the air-conditioning was chilling me and I felt the cold in the game whilst in the caverns – superb immersion.

      • JustNiz

        Extra latency won’t be an issue at all, as the time it takes for an electric signal to pass down an additional 15ft of wire is for all practical purposes zero. The only problem you _might_ run into with daisy-chaining HDMI is that passive HDMI cables are only good for about 50ft before video signal loss/degradation starts becoming a factor. I’m using a 60ft HDMI cable just fine but its active (i.e. got booster electronics in). this one: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0186DNDR4

  • M0rdresh

    It’s ironic for a company that is so dedicated to driving mainstream ended up with 50% smaller install base than HTC VIVE. I don’t think the Oculus Rift ‘wrong direction for now’ methodology has been working for them.

    • SomeGuyorAnother

      There’s alot of false information out there about the Rift vs the Vive. Rift 3-camera roomscale currently works perfectly, they’re just not ready to label it as official in case there are any more kinks to work out. They’ve worked more slowly, but more efficiently at getting a quality product out, while Vive has already replaced their chord, which they sold for an addition $50, have a new headstrap and controller releasing this year, and expensive controllers where a single one can cost you more than the entire Touch system (2 controllers + camera) combined. While neat, the new pucks fit into that niche within a niche within a niche system, where only some programs will support it, will have limited support, or just exist as a gimmick within the program. This, along with the price, will only entice enthusiasts (much like the Leap Motion did). What’s important is establishing a strong base system with great programs and support. Vive has good tracking, yes, but SteamVR is much less stable than Oculus home and with a poor interface, whose only advantage is the already well establish friend’s list.

      • M0rdresh

        Well you have shared your personal believes and the roughly the pros and cons, but I don’t see how it is directly correlated with what I wrote. The HTC VIVE sold twice the amount of units, that is saying something and a testament of the costumer, I don’t think that’s for the Steam friendlist alone.

        It’s also not because they finally managed to get room scale working with 1.12 that numerous reports over the past months are false information. You make a couple of good points, the strap and hmd display replacement to remedy less then optimal original design, I use the originals and am fine with them, I value the larger roomscale and super tracking.

        I have the luxury of owning both btw, gives some perspective. I like em both for different reasons, but false information, sorry, no.

  • Bruce

    If you wanna have any kind of cool motion game, like an exercise game, you need wireless. You can’t be doing pushups and get all caught up in stupid cables. Wireless is the one and only future of VR.