Yeah. Was it the iPhone 4 or 4S that Siri didn’t work on?
Was it slow 3G that prevented Facetime from being brought to the masses early?
I wait with bated breath for your response.
This, exactly this. Which I've said in this thread as well.
Yeah. Was it the iPhone 4 or 4S that Siri didn’t work on?
Was it slow 3G that prevented Facetime from being brought to the masses early?
I wait with bated breath for your response.
After the Apple-bash-fest, perhaps the VR folks should take a break to look at why their requirements are so high. We've seen that scenario over and over again in gaming for 15+ years, and it rarely ends well for anyone involved. Yes, we all acknowledge we can't get a GTX 980 Ti in a Mac, but this sort of rhetoric is not helpful.
Still waiting for iisdan.This, exactly this. Which I've said in this thread as well.
Still waiting for iisdan.
He's right. Macs are nice web browsing machines but they suck for gaming. Just awful.
After the Apple-bash-fest, perhaps the VR folks should take a break to look at why their requirements are so high. We've seen that scenario over and over again in gaming for 15+ years, and it rarely ends well for anyone involved. Yes, we all acknowledge we can't get a GTX 980 Ti in a Mac, but this sort of rhetoric is not helpful.
Except it isn't. PS4 is behind the times compared to the even the mobile 960
Sorry. You’re not allowed to say things like that. You must be dehydrated. I suggest you go and get yourself a drink, how about some Kool Aid?Well we know when Apple does it - it's to maintain the integrity of the feature. Apple makes NO sacrifices. But Oculus should. They should lessen the experience of their product to fit Apple's specs. Right?
Well i grant you the the mac port of ets2 is questionable but a game from last year? As usual i formulated my question wrong, and of corse did nor gar an snswer rhat loft me any more informed, so I'll try again
What is your deffinision of a modern game?
Well I guess I'm just a settler. So because a more powerful GPU is available that instantly means that the PS4 isn't capable? I would think not.
Has anyone actually looked at what the games will be like? Yes, I'm sure there's a cool factor to feeling like you're in another world, but that wears off and the games are far less dynamic than your non-VR variety. Most games I've seen have you stationary, which makes sense because you can't move around. This will flop, as VR has flopped so many times in the past.
what you said was the PS4 will blow away PC because of it's design. It didn't blow away PC's when it was introduced three years ago and it really isn't going to now.
Yeah. Was it the iPhone 4 or 4S that Siri didn’t work on?
Was it slow 3G that prevented Facetime from being brought to the masses early?
I wait with bated breath for your response.
Kind of depends on the PC doesn't it? Plus as Apple users we know optimization goes a long way.
Not really. With a PC, you can buy your own video card that meets the specs needed but with macs, you are stuck with what they choose to offer.Hummm... so I doubt 95% of the PC users will be able to use it either. Sounds like very high-end video requirements. Not something your average PC (of any brand) is going to have.
With a hackintosh, you can choose almost any PC GPU for OS X. Nvidia provides OS X drivers, ATI has built-in drivers in OS.Not really. With a PC, you can buy your own video card that meets the specs needed but with macs, you are stuck with what they choose to offer.
I recommend while you claim "pure marketting", you look at what has changed between the early dev models and the current retail version.
Dk2
1080p display (960x1080 per eye)
60 hz refresh 60-75FPS minimum requirements
6 dimensional position tracking
Rift Retail;
2160x1200 diplsay (1080x1200 per eye)
90Hz refresh (90+ FPS)
3d positional sound
So for just pure raw crunching power. the new Rift version requires 2592000 pixels per frame. 90 times a second. thats 233,280,000 pixels per second.
it must also be ablso to calculate this many pixels per second, for TWO distinct display angles. Rendering every scene twice
compared to the older display: 2073600 pixels per frame. 518400 less. that's 20% less power required, just from the display. But it's not even as simple. It's not linear. As you increase the resolutions you increase calculations required, because you increase the required texture sizes and counts. This turns into likely a 50% or closer increase in requirements
Just to further. At 60fps, the lower unit only pushes only 124416000 pixels a second. That means the retail Oc Rift is pushing 180% MORE pixels per second.