So I just bought an Oculus Rift S...

[EdL]

So I just bought an Oculus Rift S and ... was I expecting too much?

I've been testing for an hour and my initial impression is the visuals are soft, fuzzy and give the feeling of blurred vision.

I have AA on 3x and super-sampling at 1.5x. Any higher and my Vega64 drops frames.

To be honest, unless I have some settings wrong, I'm pretty let down by the experience.

edit: perhaps I've been spoilt by my Ultrawide which is not only high rez but high pixel density. The difference between the screen and VR is like watching a television from the 80s!

 

[Michael Lowe]

If this is your first experience in VR, then you probably expected too much. I was excited when I first fired up the oculus dk2. God I was disappointed. But once I accepted it for what it was, I loved it.

 

[Cote Dazur]

So I just bought an Oculus Rift S and ... was I expecting too much?

To be honest, unless I have some settings wrong, I'm pretty let down by the experience.

The difference between the screen and VR is like watching a television from the 80s!

From what I read, VR is probably not for you, when I first tried the DK2, back then I was totally amazed by the being there feeling, everything in 3D, everything in real scale life size. Finally a good look at not only 1/4 of the cockpit, the whole cockpit, then turned my head, could see the whole interior of the car. If this does not blow you away, then you are in love with watching a game on a tiny screen, sitting in your room, that is ok, but that is what sounds like 80”s to me.

 

[EdL]

Well, in fairness to VR - it's made me 0.5s faster and more consistent already... and I've only had it a few hours.

I'll persevere.

I've got a Valve Index on order too, hopefully that's a bit better (heard it's crisper and better FOV).

 

[jv8]

Haven't used my original Rift in a while... but yeah everything close (like the cockpit) blew me away... but when you focused far down the track the pixelated blur got to me.

 

[ThugUK]

I know with the CV1 and Vive you need to find ‘the sweet spot’.
This is an area within the screen which is sharp and is found by moving the headset itself.
Are you sure it’s positioned properly?

 

[ykap1]

It's definitely your own expectations, VR visuals are a blurry step down in general and for sim racing looking ahead always brings out the worst. For most titles you're looking around yourself 2-5 metres or so, whereas sim racing it's more like 10-100m. Assuming you have the IPD and sweet spot etc. setup correctly have a look around the cockpit which should be clear, and then compare that to looking ahead and you'll see the limitations of VR, namely the lack of detail and fuzziness you describe. I say give it a try for a while longer as the immersion factor is amazing and see if it's something you can live with.

The sweet spot on the Rift S is much larger and forgiving than the original Rift too, that was a significant step down. Also keep in mind SS apparently doesn't scale as well on the S, so maybe do some benchmarking to see where the sweet spot is, something i haven't done myself yet.

 

[EdL]

I know with the CV1 and Vive you need to find ‘the sweet spot’.
This is an area within the screen which is sharp and is found by moving the headset itself.
Are you sure it’s positioned properly?

I noticed this immediately and yes, I made sure I got it in the sweetspot.

 

[EdL]

It's definitely your own expectations, VR visuals are a blurry step down in general and for sim racing looking ahead always brings out the worst. For most titles you're looking around yourself 2-5 metres or so, whereas sim racing it's more like 10-100m. Assuming you have the IPD and sweet spot etc. setup correctly have a look around the cockpit which should be clear, and then compare that to looking ahead and you'll see the limitations of VR, namely the lack of detail and fuzziness you describe. I say give it a try for a while longer as the immersion factor is amazing and see if it's something you can live with.

You're right, VR in it's current state probably wasn't designed with sim racing in mind. The distance is the issue, ever with the graphic settings cranked up to GPU 'melting point'!

I need to look past the clarity issue, I'm sure I'll get used to it. If you look at the issues, they're glaringly obvious, if you relax and enjoy the experience then it certainly feels better.

I can now however see why people favour triple setups, or at least there's a big divide between VR lovers and Triple warriors.

 

[Terry Rock]

So I just bought an Oculus Rift S and ... was I expecting too much?

I've been testing for an hour and my initial impression is the visuals are soft, fuzzy and give the feeling of blurred vision.

I have AA on 3x and super-sampling at 1.5x. Any higher and my Vega64 drops frames.

To be honest, unless I have some settings wrong, I'm pretty let down by the experience.

edit: perhaps I've been spoilt by my Ultrawide which is not only high rez but high pixel density. The difference between the screen and VR is like watching a television from the 80s!

A lot of the experience in VR comes down to fitment.
If you haven't already done so, try moving your headset up/down and slightly left/right, while focusing on any image on screen.
Very tiny adjustment can and do sometimes make a massive difference.
Does the 'S' have an IPD adjuster like the CV1?
That too made a lot of difference to what was seen in VR.
Don't initially start with massive amounts of Super-sampling...remember, it is a balance of visuals versus performance.

 

[Cote Dazur]

You're right, VR in it's current state probably wasn't designed with sim racing in mind

SIM driving with Flight SIM is the one of the best use of VR, if not the best, it fits like hand and glove. It brings us the best immersion sim experience that we could only dream of 10 years ago.

I can now however see why people favour triple setups, or at least there's a big divide between VR lovers and Triple warriors

Their is no “big divide” between VR and triple. Triple was here first, so for some leaving the high amount of money and the sacrifice in space requirement necessary for triples behind is a hard decision and they think they have to defend it. A lot of triple user use both since they both are the best way to enjoy sim racing. For someone who has nothing, VR is the most immersive, most economical and space friendly solution.

VR is not perfect, it has limitations, like any other alternative, but the overall immersion make those annoying limitation something you don’t mind living with because VR remains the best alternative.

Again, your priorities might not be compatible with the shortcomings of VR and instead of wasting your time, enjoying a 4K curved (pancake) monitor might be more your cup of tea. That is ok,

 

[EdL]

@Cote Dazur the way you write your replies is as if I'm wrong by default.

Perhaps my vision is better than yours (not a dig, it might be the case)? Because I can really, really see the shortcomings of current/latest gen VR. Distant views are by far the biggest issue. I drive looking at my next target, way beyond the current piece of tarmac... and that just looks mushy.

But I hear you, the immersion is there and I will keep using them to see how they grow on me! Spacial awareness also plays an important part with hitting entry, apex and exit accurately, something a flat screen - single or triple - can't compete with.

 

[EdL]

A lot of the experience in VR comes down to fitment.
If you haven't already done so, try moving your headset up/down and slightly left/right, while focusing on any image on screen.
Very tiny adjustment can and do sometimes make a massive difference.
Does the 'S' have an IPD adjuster like the CV1?
That too made a lot of difference to what was seen in VR.
Don't initially start with massive amounts of Super-sampling...remember, it is a balance of visuals versus performance.

It does indeed have IPD and I have tweaked it. As per the comments above, my initial impressions are softening because the weakness of VR (clarity, particularly at distance) might be trumped by the good bits, the immersion and awareness.

That initial shock of 'this doesn't look great' is slowly giving way to, but this feels pretty good.

 

[Ceolmor]

It does indeed have IPD and I have tweaked it. As per the comments above, my initial impressions are softening because the weakness of VR (clarity, particularly at distance) might be trumped by the good bits, the immersion and awareness.

That initial shock of 'this doesn't look great' is slowly giving way to, but this feels pretty good.

Stick with it. I went from triple screens, to the original Rift CV1 and now the Rift S, and I like the S best. For me the immersion and awareness of VR far outweighs the lack of clarity. If you think the S is bad, you should have tried the CV1. But even after getting the CV1 I could never go back to 2D.

The S only has software IPD adjustment, and I am not convinced that it actually does anything. The CV1 and the Valve have physical IPD adjustment, which in my experience is much better. What is your IPD?

 

[EdL]

Stick with it. I went from triple screens, to the original Rift CV1 and now the Rift S, and I like the S best. For me the immersion and awareness of VR far outweighs the lack of clarity. If you think the S is bad, you should have tried the CV1. But even after getting the CV1 I could never go back to 2D.

The S only has software IPD adjustment, and I am not convinced that it actually does anything. The CV1 and the Valve have physical IPD adjustment, which in my experience is much better. What is your IPD?

61. I did tweak up and down of that, but I'd agree with you - it doesn't seem to make a huge difference.

 

[jv8]

I still think "best" is a personal choice. There are pro's and con's of each. I still lean towards triples because:

1) Comfort. I have bulky glasses and cannot wear contacts for medical reasons. Smashing heavy scuba goggles on top for long periods is a literal pain.
2) Motion sickness - especially if I spin out. My visual reference is completely disconnected from what my ears feel. Maybe once my motion rig is complete this will get better.
3) Distance clarity. I spend most of my time focusing on the track ahead... which is pretty blurry with my CV1. Again maybe the next gen of VR will address this. Honestly I think VR is at its best when you are looking at something within arms reach.

 

[EdL]

I heard about motion sickness, I've never suffered from it before and I'm glad to say even after an hour of testing and playing I didn't notice any issues. Oddly, my eyes didn't feel strained either ... I was expecting them, with screens so close, to be burnt out!

 

[Wmacky]

Perhaps think about the much higher resolution HP Reverb? ( Once they figure out how to make one correctly)

 

[EdL]

Perhaps think about the much higher resolution HP Reverb? ( Once they figure out how to make one correctly)

Agreed - sounds like the most sim orientated headset, but isn't currently available that I could find. I'll probably try one when they release again.

 

[Ceolmor]

61. I did tweak up and down of that, but I'd agree with you - it doesn't seem to make a huge difference.

Same IPD as me. As you're probably aware Rift S IPD is fixed at 63.5mm. Oculus say the Rift S is, “Best for users between 61.5 and 65.5mm,” so we're just outside. At first I was getting eye strain, but I think now my eyes have got used to it.

I bought the Rift S as a short term purchase while I waited for a Valve, or Reverb, or Cosmos etc, but I'm happy with this for the moment, so will let the dust settle on the new VR headsets.