One thing we’re often miss here is content!!! The best content creator is Sony with the PSVR so the StarVr On is aiming for a very specific market and don’t hope to have much support if you preferred steam game don’t work out of the box…
Well it depends. Currently the Pimax 5k+ is a nice HMD but it doesn’t really make you feel like you’re ‘there’, in that other world. Supposedly that’s the big difference with the Star VR. Sebastian said that he really felt he was there, in that other world and I think VooDooDE said the same thing. If that’s the difference this HMD can bring to the table, then it’s a real game changer.
Then again, I too will wait first for more reviews and I want to hear more about steamVR compatibility first before emptying my pockets.
That is absolutely true, even if hardly anybody would admit it openly
And I see the point of the StarVR having a greater potential in the sense that they have more advanced tech, but I am slightly concerned that StarVR may aim at the commercial market with its future products too simply because they believe that they cannot compete with the big guns in the consumer price range and then obviously need to differentiate themselves by offering some components which the consumer products cannot afford to utilize.
Which would translate into an exceptionally high price due to both (i) the non-consumer high value components and (ii) the R&D (non-recurring) costs being spread over low volumes and little support from game devs because the StarVR headsets will never gain any substantial market share.
So they could end up having really advanced tech ahead of their time but no sufficient adoption with most of the games I am looking to use such a headset for. That would suck because currently the VR tech really needs to take a few more strides to mature. Oculus seemed destined to play the role of the one pushing the technology with their large investments into R&D, but they seem to completely focus on the entry-level cost point which will unfortunately limit them severely even if they have compelling tech in their lab - they will wait till it becomes so cheap to produce which probably means waiting for 2-3 years while higher-end competitors would take the cost hit and raise the price accordingly. This all sucks but what can we do.
I find it a bit difficult to quantify this but I guess one has to try it to understand the diffference. Perhaps comparable to the SDE, sweet spot & god rays and other nuisances of the current tech ?
You know they are there and sort of distracting and annoying, but you ignore them to a greater degree when using your headset - but still would wish they were not there at all. How much difference does that make - hmmmm, difficult to say. I wouldn’t have thought that the FoV makes that big a difference until I tried it - I was keener to get more resolution because I want a sharper image.
So yes, if the StarVR is at least to a large degree compoatible with SteamVR and Revive runs on it, it may be the best headset and if money wouldn’t matter it would probably buy it - provided the perceived sharpness is not a let down.
claimed : Those are special full RGB OLED panel with reduce SDE
It they succeeds they will be acquired by the GAFA…
Lower maybe but how much? your losing effective resolution the more you go to the edge with the Pimax. I would really be curious to include all factors.
I don’t care that much about the pixel density in the remote areas - it is the center of the view which really needs high density. In sim racing you typically have the next far bend in the middle of the screen anyhow, and even with flight sims I tend to move my head towards the far plane I am trying to spot to see details, different to the awareness point of a wide FoV where it is great that you notice something going on in your periphery but don’t need that information in high detail.
This is where a Pimax 5K+ version B with a FoV of 150° out of the box could have shone even more than the 5K+ with its sort of 200°. But okay, they chose to make the 200° mantra their second main selling point next to the “8K”, no point in lamenting that for too long.
They are owned by Acer.
LOL at people who scoffed at the Pimax price, yet are falling over themselves to pay 5 times more for something that might be 10% better.
$3200 USD sound quite expensive for a HMD I’m considering selling both of my kidne…kids
Yes yes just kidding (omg did it again)
Mrtv said despite the res image was sharp and he couldn’t even find the sde looking for it. Fov needs to and will stop being a spec once it reaches our natural visual limitation. Starvr was right in covering total visual field of view.
All he was shown was a very restricted tech demo. Not even remotely close to what Pimax has shown to backers.
He had very limited time and only saw their tech demo. The 3 testers also say the pimax has basically almost no SDE and it is not cofirmed by the owners. It might be sharp but the resolution is low. This is a problem when plying sims for example.
I am not trying to make the Star VR One look bad. I bet it will be great but the technical facts are on the table and those alone make sure that it has its limitations. There is no way around it. The resolution is simply too low.
Next Friday I have an intake appointment with an eye lasering facility so I can get rid of my glasses for around 2800 euros… So… Do glasses fit in a Star VR?
Still on the fence on their clearly declared 210 horizontal fov that was supposedly also a key spec in the original. Geometry of the screens makes it hard to believe to be legit as the screen needs to be visible on the side of the face.
But independent tests in the wild will reveal much of what is & isn’t.
Samsung O+/Vive Pro have 1440×1600, giving it 16,0 ppd (100° horizontally)
Pimax 5K+ has 2560x1440, providing for 15,0 ppd (170° horizontally)
Now StarVR One is coming in at 1830x1464, translating into 8,7 pixel per degree (210° horizontally).
Doesn’t sound that compelling, does it ?
But in defence of the StarVR it should be mentioned that they claim that their subpixel arrangement gives them a factor 1,5 over traditional (non-full RGB stripe) subpixel arrangements.
That would mean 8,7 ppd x 1,5 = 13,1 ppd. So it would be in the same ballpark as the others, if this is proven to be be accurate. On the one side, in truth it will be pushing only the pixel information of 8,7 ppd as opposed to the roughly 14-15 ppd the others push. On the other side the others then continue to suppress some of the information (every second R or B subpixel would not be shown ?) so the question is which approach results in a better picture with more details and color trueness. No clue, to be honest.
However, for the steep price I’d hope for a substantial improvement over the 5K+ other than “just” an even wider FoV (at a level where I am not looking for that any more) and, it appears, mainly the promise of not having some of the flaws the 5K+ has.
If you cannot get yourself to not see the flaws of the 5K+, it may be worth it for the individual user.
But if you can, you would end up paying +1,800$ for a device to not see flaws which on the alternative 5K+ you wouldn’t really notice either after a couple of days of accommodation.
But again, if you don’t even care about value for money considerations but simply have the money to play with, it may simply be the better headset, and then you’ll get it just for that reason.
I’m pretty sure @mixedrealityTV said his full view was covered in his “test/review” (he wasn’t given the freedom to try anything else than what they had already set up) of the StarVR One. Everything besides the nose piece was covered.
Your 5k+ spec is incorrect. 5120x1440 for 2560x1440/eye.
Vs Odyssy+ of 2880x1600 or 1440x1600/eye.
The Odyssy & vive pro have more Horizontal res.
Thx, corrected it (though I used the first value of the two for the calculation, which I did get right - but should of course have all values correct)
Or is the Odyssey & Vive Pro 16,0 ppd because I should use 1600 ?