• Welcome to the Angry Joe Show Army!

    Join our community of gamers passionate about our community and our hobby! Whether it's playing, discussing, or watching games, regardless of platform, genre, or location, we have a place for you, always!

  • PS4 Forum

    The AJSA Playstation 4 Division: Game Nights and More!

    The AJSA is on Playstation 4! Join us for weekly Game Nights with a selection of the best games the PS4 has to offer!

  • XBO Forum

    The AJSA Xbox One Division: We Got You Covered!

    The AJSA Xbox One Division is ready to connect with you on XBox Live with a ton of events for the best Xbox games!

  • News Archive

    The Best News from the Best Sites, Every Week.

    The AJSA News Collection Team is hard at work condensing a week's worth of news into one giant-sze digest for you to chew on and discuss! Links to source articles are always provided!

  • More Info

    The AJSA Expeditionary Force: Deploying to Play the Best PC Games!

    The elite vanguard of the AJSA, the Expeditionary Force (EF) chooses a new PC game every week! Join us for weekly events and help decide if the game has a future in the AJSA.

  • The Team

    Streaming Now: The AJSA Stream Team

    Joe can't stream every game, but our talented AJSA Stream Team covers a wide variety of games and personalities! Check them out, and show them some AJSA Love!

  • The Tube

    The AJSA Community YouTube Channel

    Featuring news, gameplay clips, and more from the community! The Community is a chance to showcase the best moments in AJSA Gaming!

Crazycrab

Oculus Rift Angry Review

39 posts in this topic

 

So Angry Joe and Other Joe jump into VR with the Oculus Rift.  Is it a legitimate gaming experience or another overpriced gimmick?

 

(Note they complained the Alienware PC that he uses not having the required USB 3.0 sockets but on further inspection it did on the back)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great, now he's jumping into tech gadget reviews..

Something I did not originally subscribe to Joe in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Glaice said:

Great, now he's jumping into tech gadget reviews..

Something I did not originally subscribe to Joe in the first place.

 

What's wrong with him doing hardware reviews, especially when it is a gaming device?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's branching out into too many different things and I have zero interest in VR gimmickery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't expect this guy's hardware videos to be anything like Linustechtips. Hell, from what I'm seeing, it's not far from the way he do movie reviews. As long as he doesn't skip on a game review because he reached his quota for the week or whatever with this kind of stuff than I'm fine with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Glaice said:

Great, now he's jumping into tech gadget reviews..

Something I did not originally subscribe to Joe in the first place.

.... Its a device for playing games and watching movies.

Joes channel is about video games and movies.

Why would he not review this?

Crazycrab likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Glaice said:

Great, now he's jumping into tech gadget reviews..

Something I did not originally subscribe to Joe in the first place.

gRbOhrc.jpg

 

Laserrifle125 and Crazycrab like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Glaice said:

Great, now he's jumping into tech gadget reviews..

Something I did not originally subscribe to Joe in the first place.

Well you can't judge based on yourself. Many people are interested in this stuff and hardware is kind of connected to gaming. Also just don't watch the hardware reviews if you don't like it.

 

I think it's fine if he does it, as long as it doesn't slow down the game reviews. 

Crazycrab likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of these kinds of reviews... Surprised the audio quality is meh, thats a shame. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the purpose of this video is two fold. The first of course being the review itself. It makes sense that Joe would review this product as it's supposed to be the next big thing in gaming. The second is that it's sort of an announcement that Joe has an Oculus Rift. Gives his followers an idea that he can review VR games in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion is this is Kinect 10.0. I don't see VR revolutionizing gaming at all. Only the very hardcore that have to have all the hardware and kids that have parents with too much money will get this. Looking at the recommended PC specs, mine could run it (I have no intention of getting this btw) but there is probably a very big majority that can't. I just don't see it having a long lasting appeal and a repeat of Kinect/PS Eye will happen.

 

As far as Joe doing this as a review...once again his channel and I'm sure he is aware of the affect it has on his channel whether good or bad.

Raspharus and Malphisto like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I don't understand how people can be so convinced that these things are merely 'gimmicks'... Don't get me wrong, I'm not someone who thinks this is going to turn gaming into star trek's holodeck or something. But it is most certainly beyond a simple 'gimmick'... Just consider it from a practical viewpoint, ignore the hype and the 'amazing innovation' factors, or even the immersion factors... consider that they range from 500-600 bucks to get a viewing area that is 100%...I've seen people spend more cash just to have 3 monitors on their desk! Nobody tells them multiple monitors is some useless gimmick... Why do people spend over a grand just for a big TV, when the oculus can occupy even more viewing area for less... granted you aren't going to have multiple people viewing the VR headsets at once, but given nearly every game these days is getting rid of hotseat and is forcing people to play 1 person per rig online, does it really matter? Maybe I'm missing something, but when I'm playing a game, I'm 99.99% of the time the ONLY person sitting in front of the monitor... so why cough up a grand on a big screen when I can cough up less cash for a screen designed to wrap around my face and offer a far far greater screen to viewing area ratio?

 

Why buy 2 or 3 monitors for 1 user when you can just have one that is large and adaptable enough to serve the same function?

 

The only real issue preventing VR headsets from making bigger screens or more screens obsolete for people who generally game alone in their home (maybe it isn't most people but I think it is since hotseat gaming is deader than disco now) is compatibility with the games. I'm not saying go out and buy one now, I certainly wont. But as soon as these things are going to function at a basic level of simply being able to be used as a monitor for whatever for general use, monitors will become pretty obsolete for me. Not because of VR or innovation. But just because the cost to viewing area ratio is better. Not to mention the screen is actually smaller so chances are you can afford a higher end viewing surface like an OLED at 4k instead of an LCD at 1080p or whatever. Though I doubt there's really much need for 4k on such a small screen, maybe I'm wrong but whatever, my point is hopefully obvious. I just mean manufacturing costs of the screen is not going to multiply so much because they need to do that to a much larger area. Kinda like the price of fabric on a small dress showing a lot of skin (name brand/fashion designer premium aside)  will cost less than a large dress that covers up.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ghaleon said:

But as soon as these things are going to function at a basic level of simply being able to be used as a monitor for whatever for general use, monitors will become pretty obsolete for me. Not because of VR or innovation. But just because the cost to viewing area ratio is better. Not to mention the screen is actually smaller so chances are you can afford a higher end viewing surface like an OLED at 4k instead of an LCD at 1080p or whatever.

 

For that to happen (currently), you need to spend at LEAST $1500 on a PC to even be able to use this VR. And that's only if you can get decent prices all around because the GPU alone is $300-400 for recommended specs. Mine is worth over $2000 and that's still way too much to simply view 360 after spending another $500 for the device itself making it to be a cost of $2500+, and I seriously doubt it's going to run full HD. I don't mean to argue with you at all, just that it's not a practical use item unless you have money and intend to ONLY look at your PC. Seems like a chore to have a 100% view and then have to take it off or whatever to pay attention to something else. It will most likely have practical uses, but I don't see gaming, general PC use or watching movies (looking at you 3D) one of those uses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate the effort that went into the vid HOWEVER.... The complaints about USB 3.0? Really? I want MORE USB 3.0 devices. It's not Oculus's fault that Alienware failed to implement hardware that emerged back in 2008. It's Joe's fault for going Alienware, not shortsidedness on Oculus. That irked the HELL out of me. The rest of the vid was good though. Although, I do think the Vive looks SO much better.

 

And to counter you here. lol

1 minute ago, Rain said:

For that to happen (currently), you need to spend at LEAST $1500 on a PC to even be able to use this VR. And that's only if you can get decent prices all around because the GPU alone is $300-400 for recommended specs. Mine is worth over $2000 and that's still way too much to simply view 360 after spending another $500 for the device itself making it to be a cost of $2500+, and I seriously doubt it's going to run full HD. I don't mean to argue with you at all, just that it's not a practical use item unless you have money and intend to ONLY look at your PC. Seems like a chore to have a 100% view and then have to take it off or whatever to pay attention to something else. It will most likely have practical uses, but I don't see gaming, general PC use or watching movies (looking at you 3D) one of those uses.

There are many cases in which VR IS practical, gaming and not. Right now it's more gimmiky because of the barrier to entry, but even if VR isn't at the state where it pleases you now, you have to admit that VR breaking into the consumer marketplace is HUGE for Tech advancement all around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jayson's Rage said:

There are many cases in which VR IS practical, gaming and not. Right now it's more gimmiky because of the barrier to entry, but even if VR isn't at the state where it pleases you now, you have to admit that VR breaking into the consumer marketplace is HUGE for Tech advancement all around.

Oh definitely, VR was all in the movies and military pretty much all my life and finally here it is. It will be interesting to see how far they can take it, I'm sure it will be far more handy for engineers and software programmers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fascinated to see where the tech goes, but I'm also fascinated at where it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The harsh reality here is that this technology is still not an example of true Virtual Reality. Its essentially a reboot for the Virtual Boy. For those who don't know what THAT thing was:

And while the first immediate thought anyone will have is that this thing and the Rift are from two totally different periods of gaming history, the fact remains that they are still both the exact same concept. The Rift and all these other VR devices coming out all primarily work off of isolating your visual and auditory senses to simulate more "immersion" which is just straight up stupid. You're basically strapping an HD monitor to your eyeballs with a headset and using your head to control the camera as opposed to just using your thumb with a controller.

That's it. That's all this is. Its an overpriced, more advanced Virtual Boy that gives you the illusion of a VR experience. The technology just is not there yet, science hasn't progressed enough to allow for such a thing. A true example of real Virtual Reality is seen in Sword Art Online:

Technology capable of rendering a cyberspace, a system in which data from all five senses is not only transferred across that space but is also received. Neural Feedback in which a person is detached from their physical body in this world and dives into this other world. The true representation of a "Virtual Reality" that is akin to being its own form of expressed existence. THAT is what I would consider the "next evolution" of gaming while the Rift and the other various copycats are simply pale imitations pretending to be the next level of gaming development. For years the major allure of such things as MMORPGs and the like has always been the ability to go beyond the confines of your own life/reality, to do things that you could never do in real life. This is true for gaming itself in many respects.

 

That being said, this is a double edged sword.

 

Should this current VR trend crash and burn, the odds of us seeing something like SAO becoming a reality will likely get set back quite a number of years. Of course, it also stands to reason that should the Rift and other such devices prove successful, it could just as well create a barrier in which developers stop trying to further advance the technology to accept the current concept. I mean how aggressive have they been to push the notion that this is VR? Trying to make this the accepted norm. And how many have already accepted it as such? To consider this to be some sort of massive accomplishment when all they are really doing is taking current age technology and repackaging it as a consumer product? There are pros and cons everywhere with this.

 

I have no doubt in my mind that one day science will progress enough to make a true VR Device. That is the natural evolution of our species, to achieve a point in which we can break the bonds of the physical realm and limitations. After all, when you break a person down to their core component, our minds are what define our existence and only simply rely upon our bodies to sustain life. Gaming was born of our imagination, and imagination is the root of all evolution. In which case, it makes sense that gaming itself will serve as the avenue for this. Its just a matter of time.

 

I personally will not be buying the Rift or any such device. These games promise nothing outside of the same kind of experience I could have just as well playing like I normally do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Malphisto said:

Of course, it also stands to reason that should the Rift and other such devices prove successful, it could just as well create a barrier in which developers stop trying to further advance the technology to accept the current concept. I mean how aggressive have they been to push the notion that this is VR? Trying to make this the accepted norm. And how many have already accepted it as such? To consider this to be some sort of massive accomplishment when all they are really doing is taking current age technology and repackaging it as a consumer product? There are pros and cons everywhere with this.

I see all your points but this one. If VR does become successful, you're not going to see it become stagnant like that. Right now there are 3 major players, none of which like backing down when it comes to trying to overshadow the other (Well, dunno about Oculus, but I would assume so, as the "pioneers" of this resurgence) not just in flash but in power. You're going to see some extremely gimmicky things come out while that technological arms race is ongoing, but it's extreeeeemly doubtful any of these will cause a downfall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jayson's Rage said:

I see all your points but this one. If VR does become successful, you're not going to see it become stagnant like that. Right now there are 3 major players, none of which like backing down when it comes to trying to overshadow the other (Well, dunno about Oculus, but I would assume so, as the "pioneers" of this resurgence) not just in flash but in power. You're going to see some extremely gimmicky things come out while that technological arms race is ongoing, but it's extreeeeemly doubtful any of these will cause a downfall.

The problem there being that we already saw the Kinect and its ilk level out and then drop off into obscurity. Actually, we've seen this happen a lot in gaming history. In the end, the industry always takes a concept and then goes with whatever proves the most cost efficient. And this time around you're narrowing the potential buyers in the market right off the bat with that hefty price tag.

The concept of VR is what they are marketing here, even though it really isn't actual Virtual Reality we're dealing with. But they are pushing that notion hard because they want society to adopt this as being that.

 

Query: "Why should I bother investing more finances into further research of VR Technology when the masses already accept this as such and are willing to pay boat loads of money to me to have it? Besides, too much immersion would only hurt my profits in the long run anyway if they are spending too much time in only a handful of games... Wouldn't it be better for my bottom line if I can just keep stringing them along with the same old shit wrapped up in a nice new package?"

Business and Passion rarely go hand in hand these days.

Rain likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but you're forgetting something. Porn is backing the VR industry as well. When the Porn Industry backs something, it explodes (pun seriously not intended but I fail to thing of another word right now lol)

Seriously though, when the Gaming AND Porn industry back something, that thing is going to get insane attention and financial backing to become better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was never really impressed until I saw that virtual desktop trailer.

Not enough for me to buy, but I do like where all of this is going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TamaskanLEM said:

Was never really impressed until I saw that virtual desktop trailer.

Not enough for me to buy, but I do like where all of this is going.

Holy shit. I need. Honestly, I see this working WONDERS for me when I'm working on music.

Also RICK AND MORTY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are talking about how it's not actually VR and whatever, that's all fine and I agree. But I fail to see anyone argue how this isn't a good thing purely from a field of view to cost improvement. Nobody is talking about how curved TVs are a stupid gimmick, and they accomplish less than a Visual headset at a greater cost. Plus these are generation 1. If and when their price drops to the 300 dollar range, I see little reason not to buy one over mid-range+ monitor unless it's for multiple people simultaneously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ghaleon said:

People are talking about how it's not actually VR and whatever, that's all fine and I agree. But I fail to see anyone argue how this isn't a good thing purely from a field of view to cost improvement. Nobody is talking about how curved TVs are a stupid gimmick, and they accomplish less than a Visual headset at a greater cost. Plus these are generation 1. If and when their price drops to the 300 dollar range, I see little reason not to buy one over mid-range+ monitor unless it's for multiple people simultaneously.

There's multiple reasons, and just because nobody here is talking about the other nonsensical gimmicks out there doesn't mean they aren't also equally acknowledged as such. Curved TVs simply aren't the topic here. As for the reasons why NOT to buy one?

Outside of outlining what I already explained regarding accepted norms turning into barriers that prevent continued innovation, the fact of the matter is that this is once more a mass production paid beta test. No one actually knows what prolonged use of these things will do to a person both physically and mentally. I can already determine what some of those reports will end up being.

1: Neck Pain/Neck related problems.
2: Sensory Disorders. (Eye Problems)
3: Seizures. (Not like normal gaming doesn't already have this problem, this would definitely HUGELY increase these odds)
4: Psychological Disorders. (Pushing that isolation factor to the extreme is sure to have some fun long term side effects for folks)
5: $600-$300 could easily be spent on something else?
6: Its doesn't really offer that big of a difference for the experience. (I mean come the hell on, "Virtual Desktop"? Is ANY of this REALLY necessary? -_- )

 

Outside of all that? No, not much else stopping someone from buying one I suppose. Though that list provides plenty enough reason for me at least. That's just my opinion, at any rate.

Raspharus likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Jayson's Rage said:

Yes, but you're forgetting something. Porn is backing the VR industry as well. When the Porn Industry backs something, it explodes (pun seriously not intended but I fail to thing of another word right now lol)

Seriously though, when the Gaming AND Porn industry back something, that thing is going to get insane attention and financial backing to become better.

Oh come on lol. But ok, going with your theory of increased financial backing, what more can they possibly do besides increase resolution and 3D capabilities? That's all they do in the gaming world and that will only mean we get to spend even more money on component updates to make sure its compatible, not to mention another possible new device. It's just like pushing 3D movies on everyone, most people hate it and only the select few pay the extra for it.

 

And like both Malphisto and I said, it's already got a very minor target audience having such high requirements. Sure a lot of us here have the rigs to handle this thing, but the majority do not and never will. So dumping even more money where they won't even get a decent RoI unless they tack on a ridiculous price tag doesn't make sense. And downgrading visuals won't help because what's the point in looking at sub-480p in full view when that's worse than normal vision? If this VR is going to survive it won't be because of gamers.

40 minutes ago, Ghaleon said:

People are talking about how it's not actually VR and whatever, that's all fine and I agree. But I fail to see anyone argue how this isn't a good thing purely from a field of view to cost improvement. Nobody is talking about how curved TVs are a stupid gimmick, and they accomplish less than a Visual headset at a greater cost. Plus these are generation 1. If and when their price drops to the 300 dollar range, I see little reason not to buy one over mid-range+ monitor unless it's for multiple people simultaneously.

The cost is the same. However, Oculus takes a damn near fully updated PC to run it and at the moment it's cost effective. It will be another year or two before the recommended components start to become decently priced, but that's just "recommended". At the same time TVs are constantly getting cheaper with even higher resolutions coming out. Hell I paid $2200 years ago for my Samsung 55" LED and now its like $1200-1500 or something like that. With gaming out of the equation for VR, what's the point of having a crazy field of view for navigating Windows? Even if they gave you gloves to have motion interaction...see now I'm trying to explain things that don't exist. My point is, Kinect 10.0.

Malphisto likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now