Oculus reveals $199 standalone 'Go' VR headset, drops Rift price to $399

AppleInsider

Presenting at an event in San Jose on Wednesday, Facebook's Oculus introduced the Go, a new headset capable of operating without a connected phone, Mac, or Windows PC.

The device will sport a WQHD (2,560-by-1,440) display and built-in spatial audio, with an option for external headphones via a 3.5mm jack, executives said. Wearers will only be able to glance around spaces instead of walking around a room, the latter being a major feature of high-end PC headsets like the Oculus Rift and HTC Vive.

To ensure app support, the Go will be compatible with all titles for Samsung's Gear VR. The latter product is based on Oculus technology but sells for an even cheaper price since a Samsung smartphone is required for processing and display.

Oculus has shared few other details except to say that the first development kits will ship in November ahead of an "early 2018" launch.

In the meantime the company is permanently dropping the price of a Rift bundle with Touch controllers from $499 to $399. That also includes six free apps, such as Robo Recall and two artistic titles, Medium and Quill. A new version of the Rift's dash interface -- Rift Core 2.0 -- combines every app and menu into a central hub, and introduces Home, a personal VR environment.

A long-term project is "Santa Cruz," something Oculus is promising will bring "the magic of a PC VR experience to an untethered form factor." The technology was teased last year, and this year the company showed off new controllers enabling six degrees of freedom.

Apple has largely steered away from VR in favor of augmented reality. macOS High Sierra does, however, lay the groundwork for VR on Macs.

jd_in_sb

Apple had WISELY stayed away from VR though I wouldn’t be surprised if they have one in the works to allow them to rapidly enter the VR space should they choose to one day. 

SpamSandwich

Still has no appeal to me personally, but for early adopters who are willing to be cut off from the rest of the world in a head-mounted isolation tank... go for it.

txsbaker75

I've seen several articles on the Go device touting that it doesn't need a phone or PC to operate. Where does it get the content from? What kind of processing power can it have for $199? Rift requires a substantial computer and graphics card to run, and Gear requires an $800 phone. Is it essentially a VR iPod? Since it's Gear compatible, it likely runs Android in some form. Personally, I think Apple is right on this technology. It's neat, but it's too niche and the applications are very limited right now. No one wants to strap a display to their face for very long. The ergonomics alone are problematic; add to that the as-yet untested long-term impact on vision... AR makes more sense for real-world applications, but the tech is even further out than VR.

cali

Haha and people here wanted to argue with me about an iPhone-less VR headset.

For some reason people thought VR headsets needed an iPhone or iknockoff strapped to their face to work.

As I said long ago, if Apple ever were to get into this space it wouldn’t be nerdy goggles with an iPhone strapped to your face. 

NY1822

i guess it's for some people

viclauyyc

AppleInsider said:

Presenting at an event in San Jose on Wednesday, Facebook's Oculus introduced the Go, a new headset capable of operating without a connected phone, Mac, or Windows PC.

The device will sport a WQHD (2,560-by-1,440) display and built-in spatial audio, with an option for external headphones via a 3.5mm jack, executives said. Wearers will only be able to glance around spaces instead of walking around a room, the latter being a major feature of high-end PC headsets like the Oculus Rift and HTC Vive.

To ensure app support, the Go will be compatible with all titles for Samsung's Gear VR. The latter product is based on Oculus technology but sells for an even cheaper price since a Samsung smartphone is required for processing and display.

Oculus has shared few other details except to say that the first development kits will ship in November ahead of an "early 2018" launch.

In the meantime the company is permanently dropping the price of a Rift bundle with Touch controllers from $499 to $399. That also includes six free apps, such as Robo Recall and two artistic titles, Medium and Quill. A new version of the Rift's dash interface -- Rift Core 2.0 -- combines every app and menu into a central hub, and introduces Home, a personal VR environment.

A long-term project is "Santa Cruz," something Oculus is promising will bring "the magic of a PC VR experience to an untethered form factor." The technology was teased last year, and this year the company showed off new controllers enabling six degrees of freedom.

Apple has largely steered away from VR in favor of augmented reality. macOS High Sierra does, however, lay the groundwork for VR on Macs.

If it works well with 3D and VR porn. It will sell well.  

fastasleep

SpamSandwich said:

Still has no appeal to me personally, but for early adopters who are willing to be cut off from the rest of the world in a head-mounted isolation tank... go for it.

Everyone who says stuff like this clearly hasn't tried it. Yes, it's isolating, but that's kind of the point. Like that's any different than playing a regular PS4 game in your living room alone, or burying your face in a gaming PC monitor. It's not like you go and live in there. You get in, play a game, or watch a short VR film, or whatever and get out.

I have a PSVR, and it's fucking amazing, especially considering a 1st gen product. Truly game changing.

fastasleep

txsbaker75 said:

I've seen several articles on the Go device touting that it doesn't need a phone or PC to operate. Where does it get the content from? What kind of processing power can it have for $199? Rift requires a substantial computer and graphics card to run, and Gear requires an $800 phone. Is it essentially a VR iPod? Since it's Gear compatible, it likely runs Android in some form. Personally, I think Apple is right on this technology. It's neat, but it's too niche and the applications are very limited right now. No one wants to strap a display to their face for very long. The ergonomics alone are problematic; add to that the as-yet untested long-term impact on vision... AR makes more sense for real-world applications, but the tech is even further out than VR.

Impact on vision? Got a citation for that?

chasm

txsbaker75 said:

I've seen several articles on the Go device touting that it doesn't need a phone or PC to operate. Where does it get the content from?

(caution, pure guessing below) It probably pre-loads content from a computer or smartphone (or perhaps just the net), but has some storage space and enough processing not to need a continuous connection. As noted in the article, the reason you can get away with a $200 headset rather than the $1000-plus investment previously needed is that you can only LOOK at scenarios, not INTERACT with them. So essentially, what the Oculus Go really is, is a more immersive version of the ViewMaster of old.

SpamSandwich

fastasleep said:

SpamSandwich said:

Still has no appeal to me personally, but for early adopters who are willing to be cut off from the rest of the world in a head-mounted isolation tank... go for it.

Everyone who says stuff like this clearly hasn't tried it. Yes, it's isolating, but that's kind of the point. Like that's any different than playing a regular PS4 game in your living room alone, or burying your face in a gaming PC monitor. It's not like you go and live in there. You get in, play a game, or watch a short VR film, or whatever and get out.

I have a PSVR, and it's fucking amazing, especially considering a 1st gen product. Truly game changing.

It really doesn't bother me that you or other people enjoy using these products. They're not for me.

iqatedo

txsbaker75 said:

...add to that the as-yet untested long-term impact on vision... 

Are these headsets designed such that one's focus is in the far field (or at infinity)?

tallest skil

NY1822 said:

i guess it's for some people

What, no drinker hat? Geez, this guy's a real amateur. He shouldn't have to move at all!

beowulfschmidt

fastasleep said:

Everyone who says stuff like this clearly hasn't tried it. Yes, it's isolating, but that's kind of the point. Like that's any different than playing a regular PS4 game in your living room alone, or burying your face in a gaming PC monitor. It's not like you go and live in there. You get in, play a game, or watch a short VR film, or whatever and get out.

I have a PSVR, and it's fucking amazing, especially considering a 1st gen product. Truly game changing.

I don't know that "everyone who says stuff like this clearly hasn't tried it" is completely fair.  My wife has tried my Oculus, and it just doesn't work for her.  She's very susceptible to motion sickness, and the very real disconnect between what the eyes see and the inner ear feels makes it virtually impossible for her to use one, with the exception of those types of static displays where the virtual you and the real you are both seated, with no VR motion.

That said, for me, it is, as you say, truly game changing, in a very literal sense.  I play Elite Dangerous in VR, and it's almost a different game in VR.  You are in the cockpit.

iqatedo said:

Are these headsets designed such that one's focus is in the far field (or at infinity)?

I believe my Oculus has a focus distance (not focal length) of about 1.6 meters.  Far enough away that I don't need my glasses on while using it.