How does PrioVR compare to STEM?

classic_leonclassic_leon Posts: 20
edited October 2013 in Motion Controllers
With all the press that the Sixense STEM is getting, we thought it would be useful to point out key differences in the two technologies and their respective capabilities both here and in a new FAQ we've added to the main page and included below.

There are several key differences between the STEM and PrioVR systems:
•The STEM system uses, at most, 5 magnetic sensors situated, in the general sense, on the hands, feet and head, whereas the PrioVR system uses 17 (or more if expanded) inertial motion sensors situated on the hands, feet, head, as well as additional parts of the body. What this means is that the STEM system has to ‘guess’ the pose that you are making by figuring out the position of the sensors and how they’re oriented on the hands and feet and posing the arms and legs accordingly using a calculated pose computed using inverse-kinematics. Thus, the STEM must rely upon an IK computed “best guess” pose rather than the player’s actual pose, which can lead to inaccuracies and a lack of 1:1 movement between you and your in-game avatar. As you can imagine, there are several ways you can orient your arms and legs while leaving your hands and feet unchanged, which automatically cuts out a large number of possible interactions. The PrioVR system, on the other hand, uses highly-accurate inertial sensors distributed throughout key points of the body to provide the actual orientations of the segments in question. Because of this, the data given by the PrioVR reflects the actual pose of the player and the actual motions of the player at any given time. The STEM system does not and cannot give this level of 1:1 body tracking given its current limited sensor setup.
•Both systems perform their tracking in very different ways as well. The STEM system relies upon a magnetic field generated by a base station, which severely limits the total available area in which one can freely move to within an 8 foot diameter region directly around the base-station. PriorVR calculates its orientations using the fused output of a combination of inertial sensors which frees the system from any reliance on a low-range magnetic base station.
•The STEM also cannot support multiple players with multiple STEM systems in close proximity as each STEM system must be separated by 10 feet or more. The PrioVR system, on the other hand, has no restrictions on proximity and no restrictions on multiple users.

Comparison-Chart-B.png

Q: Isn't this just like the Sixense STEM?

A: No, the Sixense STEM product and the PrioVR system are quite different in both capabilities and underlying technology.

With respect to capabilities, there are several key differences between the STEM and PrioVR systems, chief among them being that the STEM system uses only, at most, 5 magnetic sensors situated, in the general sense, on the hands, feet and head, whereas the PrioVR system uses 17 (or more if expanded) inertial motion sensors situated on the hands, feet, head, as well as additional parts of the body. What this means is that the STEM system has to ‘guess’ the pose that you are making by figuring out the position of the sensors and how they’re oriented on the hands and feet and posing the arms and legs accordingly using a calculated pose computed using inverse-kinematics. Thus, the STEM must rely upon an IK computed “best guess” pose rather than the player’s actual pose, which can lead to inaccuracies and a lack of 1:1 movement between you and your in-game avatar. As you can imagine, there are several ways you can orient your arms and legs while leaving your hands and feet unchanged, which automatically cuts out a large number of possible interactions. The PrioVR system, on the other hand, uses highly-accurate inertial sensors distributed throughout key points of the body to provide the actual orientations of the segments in question. Because of this, the data given by the PrioVR reflects the actual pose of the player and the actual motions of the player at any given time. The STEM system does not and cannot give this level of 1:1 body tracking given its current limited sensor setup.

Both systems perform their tracking in very different ways as well, with the STEM system relies upon a magnetic field generated by a base station, which severely limits the total available area in which one can freely move to within an 8 foot diameter region directly around the base-station. PriorVR calculates its orientations using the fused output of a combination of inertial sensors which frees the system from any reliance on a low-range magnetic base station. The STEM also cannot support multiple players with multiple STEM systems in close proximity as each STEM system must be separated by 10 feet or more. The PrioVR system, on the other hand, has no restrictions on proximity and no restrictions on multiple users.

Reference: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/yei ... f=activity

Comments

  • Nice info but...

    The STEM is cheaper (I backed the lowest tier cause money is a factor.)
    And the STEM can be inter changed with other divices like the future haptics controller.

    Basicly it's all about cost, it's why the Oculus is popular, why the virtuix is popular and why the stem will be. Boring but true.

    Good luck!
    Luc
  • RaoulRaoul Posts: 125
    Although price is certainly an important factor, the STEM system has other advantages over PrioVR. For me it comes down to three things:

    1) Game support. The STEM is backwards compatible with everything designed for the Razer Hydra. This allows people to continue to develop for this system before it even comes out. While PrioVR has to get their system in the hands of developers and deliver integration to major game engines before any software can support it.

    2) Convenience. Strapping on 1 to 3 STEM packs and grabbing two controllers, is a lot easier than having to strap on and plug in the multitude of sensors to the hub PrioVR uses.

    3) Technology. The STEM system is based on proven consumer technology (Hydra). PrioVR is trying to bring down their professional grade products (YEI 3-space) to a consumer price point. Many companies have tried to do something like this before. It usually results in a product that is either still too expensive for mass appeal, or compromises the performance.

    Would be awesome if PrioVR delivers on all they have promised. But I would not purchase their product until I see what they can actually produce and how well it is supported by games. And let's not forget these products can co-exist and possibly enhance each others functionality.

    BTW Tactical Haptics recently said they are looking to see if PrioVR could be used as an alternative tracker to the STEM system for the Reactive Grip. So let's see how that turns out.
  • Quote:
    Okay, okay, okay! We get it. Full body immersion is really cool, but sometimes you don’t really want to be standing up. It’s hard to balance a Mountain Dew and chips in your lap that way. So, we want to make sure you can also experience immersive VR or motion gaming while sitting in a chair or on your favorite comfy gaming couch. Ta-da! The PrioVR LZ Developer Kit – an upper-body only / wired-only suit option. The PrioVR LZ is at the $275 pledge level and consists of 7 sensor nodes, a wearable wired-only hub (which includes an internal sensor node), and all the necessary straps. So, want motion gaming without all the motion? PrioVR LZ is calling your name.

    upper-body-only-small.png

    Reference: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/yei ... 4a08a85927
  • STEM is cheaper unless you want 5 trackers. When you get only 5 tracking points for 300 and system has to estimate everything while for 350 you can have 11 track points from PrioVR or 17?? for 400 seems way much better deal for me. Yes, it is true that STEM is compatible but PrioVR is actually looking into ways to make them compatible with STEM too. The other thing is that even with Lite Prio you get far more accurate and realistic move translation than STEM.

    If games will be supported by both PrioVR and STEM while Prio will be 50-100 more expensive (might be same price with LITE due to STEMs shipping price to some countries) what will you choose? Approximate body position given by STEM which guess how your body is oriented (hands, feet) or accurate tracking of Prio which wants to develop their own VR glove after they deliver their Dev Kits?

    Remember if you want Tactical haptics it doesnt matter which system you use or as long as they will have games managed in certain ways that you do not need controller or have the VR glove.

    For the Tactical haptics I think they said they might do haptic with pre-made clip on for STEM instead of their tracker. If they do this it really doesn´t matter if you use STEM or PrioVR since both are approximately same accuracy and latency (STEM might have slightly better latency).

    As far as convenience goes I see a problem (might be wrong you can double check it). Either way you have to strap sensors on you and calibrate for few seconds everytime. PrioVR uses centralized system with one battery at wireless hub and it can be pain in the ass to wire it but you do not have to do it all the time. STEM uses battery cell in each sensor and have to be charged separately but is easier to strap into. Now the point you might want to doublecheck... PrioVR battery can be replaced in hub unit if it gets old while STEMs cannot. So if oyur battery gets old and short time use you are fucked up. (Really double check it someone it is 2 AM)

    With technology you argue that it is proven technology but was Oculus R proven technology? No they just had few demos, videos and explanations along with few who managed to try it and yet it succeeded. PrioVR is in pretty much same position. They have video (one for now), demos they did not released (shown in video), explanation of technology and few people from inside who tried new sensors and some who have one of older versions. The technology works but people need to trust it because it has not proven itself yet and this is something that YEI has to do. They need to promote PrioVR, make more videos, demos, showcases and stuff.

    Sorry for any mistakes I got to this at 2 AM...
    minichart.png
  • RaoulRaoul Posts: 125
    Chairman wrote:
    Yes, it is true that STEM is compatible but PrioVR is actually looking into ways to make them compatible with STEM too. The other thing is that even with Lite Prio you get far more accurate and realistic move translation than STEM.
    PrioVR is making plugins for major game engines, which is a good first step. But they would have to sell quite a few of these for widespread support by developers. While PrioVR uses more tracking points on your body, the accuracy and latency of the sensors still remains to be seen. With inertial sensors drift might be an issue.

    Either way we won't know how well either system will perform until we actually get our hands on them.
    Chairman wrote:
    If games will be supported by both PrioVR and STEM while Prio will be 50-100 more expensive (might be same price with LITE due to STEMs shipping price to some countries) what will you choose? Approximate body position given by STEM which guess how your body is oriented (hands, feet) or accurate tracking of Prio which wants to develop their own VR glove after they deliver their Dev Kits?
    If PrioVR lives up to it's promises I would definitely choose that. But I have to say that the "approximate" body tracking is already pretty good. Have played the Crashland demo a lot and even with just two tracking points your arms rarely feel out of place.
    Chairman wrote:
    Remember if you want Tactical haptics it doesnt matter which system you use or as long as they will have games managed in certain ways that you do not need controller or have the VR glove.

    For the Tactical haptics I think they said they might do haptic with pre-made clip on for STEM instead of their tracker.
    The Reactive Grip by Tactical Haptics will require an separate tracker, they will not be making their own sensor.

    Support for the STEM system has been confirmed. But they exploring support for other trackers and specifically mentioned PrioVR.
    Chairman wrote:
    PrioVR battery can be replaced in hub unit if it gets old while STEMs cannot. So if oyur battery gets old and short time use you are fucked up. (Really double check it someone it is 2 AM)
    The STEM battery cannot be replaced, you would have to buy a new pack ($49) or controller ($59). Which I agree is expensive. The PrioVR does not have any information I can find about replacing the battery. If not you would have to buy a new hub.
    Chairman wrote:
    With technology you argue that it is proven technology but was Oculus R proven technology? No they just had few demos, videos and explanations along with few who managed to try it and yet it succeeded. PrioVR is in pretty much same position.
    The Oculus Rift was not a proven design, that was just down to a prototype and a few demos. But they definitely used proven technology (lcd screen, gyro, accel/magnetometer, plastic lenses, etc) that they could deliver at a consumer price point.

    PrioVR also uses proven technology, but at a professional price point. The YEI 3-space sensors cost $100 each. And for PrioVR they need to bring those down to less than $20. All while keeping performance equal.
    Chairman wrote:
    They have video (one for now), demos they did not released (shown in video), explanation of technology and few people from inside who tried new sensors and some who have one of older versions. The technology works but people need to trust it because it has not proven itself yet and this is something that YEI has to do. They need to promote PrioVR, make more videos, demos, showcases and stuff.
    All the videos and demos they show use the old 3-space sensor. They have a design, but have not yet actually developed the new sensors. This is what they are looking to do with the Kickstarter funds.

    But I agree they have to do a lot better job at promoting their product. Almost feel like they jumped the gun and launched too early just so they could compete with Sixense. Maybe they will have another go at crowd funding when they have actually completed the new sensors.

    Really hope they make it, but have a feeling this is not going to be able to deliver the performance we want at the price level they are going for.
  • http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/89577853/stem-system-the-best-way-to-interact-with-virtual/posts/619784

    So STEM added the ability to use up to 15 trackers with three base systems. I was very happy to hear this news, but it does bring up some other concerns.

    Triple the Trackers = Triple the Cost. If someone wants 15 trackers, they would be looking at about a grand for controllers.

    With the cost in mind, I imagine most people will not go for multi-base systems, and developers might not implement the ability to use more than 5 trackers right?
  • Quoted:
    This update addresses the questions that we've been receiving regarding this weekend's STEM update announcement concerning multiple base-station support from Sixense.

    STEM update #14 from Oct. 5 2013 essentially announced support for up to three base station systems each supporting up to five trackers on a single PC. While this is certainly an improvement over their initial single base-station with up to five sensors, there are still problems with this configuration that are currently addressed by all base PrioVR systems without expansion.

    The problems are as follows:

    1. Cost

    STEM: The cost of ownership for a fully expanded 15 tracker STEM system breaks down as follows: 3 x 5 tracker systems @ $299 each = $897 total cost for a total of 15 trackers

    PrioVR: The cost of the PrioVR Pro system, which includes 17 trackers, the wireless hub, the wireless base station, and two hand-controller-ready input nodes = $399. Thus, for less than half the price of a fully expanded STEM system a user can get a more capable and extremely expandable ( up to 35 nodes ) system that also supports, without modification, a capture space with 10 times the radius of the STEM.

    2. Expandability

    STEM: At 15 trackers, the stem system is fully expanded.

    PrioVR: Each PrioVR system can be expanded to as many as 35 trackers per wireless hub and many multiple suits can be used simultaneously in close proximity.

    3. Multiple Users

    STEM: Since there is a maximum of 15 trackers per PC, any games requiring full-body motion tracking become impossible since all multi-player configurations require splitting the 15 sensors across the active players. This means that with two players only 7 sensors per player are possible, with three players only 5 sensors per player are possible, and with four players only three sensors per player are available. This setup also creates problems since all players must be within the 8' radius capture spaces for their respective sensors to work correctly.

    PrioVR: Each PrioVR wireless suit supports as many as 35 sensor nodes and many simultaneous wireless suits, even dozens, are supported simultaneously. This allows true full-body multi-player experiences across wide capture areas without compromise.

    4. Capture Space

    STEM: Each PC supports a maximum of three base-stations per PC with each base station supporting only an 8' radius capture space. This means that with the maximum of 15 sensors necessary for full-body motion capture, the largest capture space is limited to the 8' radius covered by all three base stations simultaneously. By spacing the base-stations out, the capture area can be expanded, but in such a configuration only 5 or fewer sensors could work simultaneously, which eliminates true full-body capture across a larger capture space. Exotic solutions such as attaching the three base-stations to the body have also been proposed, but these non-standard solutions become cumbersome, impractical, and would only provide relative positioning information from the sensors.

    PrioVR: Each PrioVR wireless system provides a 90-100 foot radius capture space out-of-the-box. By adding additional wireless base stations, this capture space can be expanded to virtually unlimited sizes without compromise.

    Source: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/yei ... f=activity
  • Just a question, but do you all think that most games will even support 15 stems or 35 provr sensors?

    First a disclaimer, I backed the 3 sensor bundle for the stem, mainly because it is more or less proven tech with game support via the hydra.

    Honestly, If the omni has its own foot tracking sensors to track how fast and what direction you run, and the rift has its own sensor to do orientation and head tracking (at least thats the plan for the consumer version), thats 2 body parts that are covered, what remains is maybe your chest, although that could be covered by mixing the data from the rift and the omni and put on a skeleton model for an avatar, and the hands, which both systems track.

    Now thinking of most action adventure games we have now, as long as there is a 'crouch,' 'walk,' 'run' and basic arm movements (often simplified for a mouse + keyboard setup), I can't think of a need as of now to be able to sit on a couch and spread out across said couch with your in game avatar doing the same. I can see some games like 2ed life doing this and to some extent a MMO, but a FPS, RTS, horror or most other types of games, I don't see people using more than the hand sensors + omni + rift (or sitting in the chair with just an rift and hand sensors using buttons / joysticks to move). Granted this line of thinking is mostly from todays games and I admit I may be 100% wrong (I would love for you all to prove me wrong in this respect), I honestly don't see the point of more than 5 sensors setup over your entire body via multiple devices.

    These are just my the thoughts I have gathered from mixing current games and VR tech, the main problem I see is space being an extremely limited factor so I really don't see someone moving about a room to much with a full VR getup, mostly just going from chair to omni and back, but with whatever HMD they use off.
  • KijutsuKijutsu Posts: 85
    SolLeks wrote:
    Just a question, but do you all think that most games will even support 15 stems or 35 provr sensors?

    First a disclaimer, I backed the 3 sensor bundle for the stem, mainly because it is more or less proven tech with game support via the hydra.

    Honestly, If the omni has its own foot tracking sensors to track how fast and what direction you run, and the rift has its own sensor to do orientation and head tracking (at least thats the plan for the consumer version), thats 2 body parts that are covered, what remains is maybe your chest, although that could be covered by mixing the data from the rift and the omni and put on a skeleton model for an avatar, and the hands, which both systems track.

    Now thinking of most action adventure games we have now, as long as there is a 'crouch,' 'walk,' 'run' and basic arm movements (often simplified for a mouse + keyboard setup), I can't think of a need as of now to be able to sit on a couch and spread out across said couch with your in game avatar doing the same. I can see some games like 2ed life doing this and to some extent a MMO, but a FPS, RTS, horror or most other types of games, I don't see people using more than the hand sensors + omni + rift (or sitting in the chair with just an rift and hand sensors using buttons / joysticks to move). Granted this line of thinking is mostly from todays games and I admit I may be 100% wrong (I would love for you all to prove me wrong in this respect), I honestly don't see the point of more than 5 sensors setup over your entire body via multiple devices.

    These are just my the thoughts I have gathered from mixing current games and VR tech, the main problem I see is space being an extremely limited factor so I really don't see someone moving about a room to much with a full VR getup, mostly just going from chair to omni and back, but with whatever HMD they use off.

    It's like he read my mind. Bravo sir.
  • RaoulRaoul Posts: 125
    @SolLeks, welcome to the forum.

    You make a very valid point, and at this moment in time it seems unlikely that any game will be supporting more than five trackers. Integrating five points of tracking that truly interact with the game environment seems hard enough, let alone 35.

    But I also believe that in 3-4 years time VR will be mainstream and at that point we will slowly start to see an increase to the number of tracking points that can be used. At first it will only be for visual purposes in something like 2nd life. But over time it just seems like the natural evolution of VR technology for all games.

    BTW if you are backing the STEM 3 tracker bundle at $250 it might be a good idea to upgrade to 5 trackers. They opened up the $300 5 tracker early bird to unlimited amount.

    At first I also backed the 3 tracker bundle but decided to upgrade when it was confirmed the OMNI uses capacitative tracking.

    This means it's very likely the OMNI will only track your foot on a 2D plane, and not be able to track your foot when it comes off the surface. It might even mean it can only track your walking direction if the game has native support for the OMNI through the SDK.

    But unfortunately we won't know until Virtuix releases the final specifications for their tracking system.
  • RaoulRaoul Posts: 125
    There is a great article about PrioVR that just came out on Road to VR. Includes the first footage of the actual PrioVR prototype sensors being used, check it out:

    http://www.roadtovr.com/priovr-prototyp ... -hands-on/
  • @ Raoul

    I see what you mean, I can see some fighting games or sword play games that having more tracking points will make it easier to dodge, however even if VR goes mainstream (Which I agree and hope for as well), I do not see a lot of players 'suiting up' to play unless the system is extremely easy and quick to suit up / down. hell, right now people have a hard time just using 3D glasses >.>
  • RaoulRaoul Posts: 125
    You are right, the mainstream market will probably not be 'suiting up' simply for tracking. But if the experience is very compelling it might. Say if they where team up with ARAIG and integrate it into their suit that could make it exiting enough to at least get gamers to wear one.

    The problem with 3D glasses is not wearing glasses, people do that all the time. It's the fact that the 3D experience is underwhelming.
  • Raoul wrote:
    You are right, the mainstream market will probably not be 'suiting up' simply for tracking. But if the experience is very compelling it might. Say if they where team up with ARAIG and integrate it into their suit that could make it exiting enough to at least get gamers to wear one.

    The problem with 3D glasses is not wearing glasses, people do that all the time. It's the fact that the 3D experience is underwhelming.

    I have to disagree with the 3D experience being underwhelming, I do have a 3D setup and games like Metro 2033 and Metro Last Light pull it of amazingly, playing in a dark room with just the single 3D screen on (I have 3) and a good set of headphones, it works amazing. There are other games like Starcraft 2 where I sometimes try to swat flying things out of the air (Jokingly xD) although most games and movies don't do 3D well at all, to the point that I can see double images and crazy shadows. its funny, when I play Last light without 3D, It feels underwhelming then.

    I guess if more games and movies where made well in 3D, people would not look at it as a gimmick.

    The same thing can happen here, If devs don't put enough uses for the extra sensors, I don't see them ever taking off.
  • RaoulRaoul Posts: 125
    Have not played any of the games you mention with 3D glasses so I can't speak to that. But I'm sure that 3D can be done well. Supposedly even 3D movies look great on a glasses that run at 144Hz like the SIM2 Lumis projectors. If this is true then I would be happy to wear glasses.

    But personally all glasses I have tried (digital cinema, IMAX, home projectors, lcd's, etc) have been terrible. Putting aside problems such as crosstalk, ghosting and dimming. The 3D has never looked natural to me as a whole. At most I get good depth perception on a single object, but the rest of the frame looks more like cardboard cut outs.

    That was the case until I got my dev kit, the 3D on it is simply amazing. The one thing the Rift does that 3D on a small screen can never do is convey the scale on an object. So as far as I'm concerned 3D glasses for games are a thing of the past. :)
  • OceanosOceanos Posts: 6
    According to this, priovr should be completely compatible AND accurate while using the Omni
    forum.yeitechnology.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=205&p=700#p700

    Priovr has all the capabilities of stem, along with greater accuracy and immersion for the player. The company will also develop gloves to go with their system soon after they are done with the initial product. I had my doubts and worries between the two systems and have been reading about both back and fourth for days. But now I know Priovr is the cheaper, and overall better buy especially if using the omni along with it.
  • NobleBrutusNobleBrutus Posts: 139
    edited July 2014
    Has PrioVR started demoing with the final (or close to) sensors yet? What put me off their kickstarter was they used re-skinned 3-space sensors which are much more expensive. The suit doesn't really seem to have changed from the kickstarter video.

    Also I notice slightly greater latency and lagging in the recent PrioVR demos than the STEM ones, so I'm not sold on PrioVR being the better alternative yet.

    I don't want to be too negative but I'm really not convinced when people say PrioVR is so much better than STEM.
  • OceanosOceanos Posts: 6
    edited July 2014
    @NobleBrutus


    according to this video which they use on their main website, I don't see the latency that you are speaking of, if anything it seems fine/un-noticeable. You can't take into account the walking animation since with the omni it wont be necessary to use their control to walk the character.
  • NobleBrutusNobleBrutus Posts: 139
    edited July 2014
    @Oceanos‌

    It's more noticeable here:

    especially with melee. Though it's nothing to worry much about. Re-watching it I realise it is probably the software at fault.

    I'm not convinced many (if any really) games will make use of all PrioVR's sensors, indeed those that use more than five will be very rare. When PrioVR talk about STEM 'guessing' the position of the rest of your body and how it's awful I recommend putting your hands out in front of you at any distance or orientation and trying to find an alternative pose that would keep all five STEM trackers in the same place and orientation (forehead, chest, feet): It is very awkward to do. Because of this, I don't think the extra sensors offer much advantage. STEM's movable individual sensors on the other hand can all be used more often and because they are tracked individually open up the possibility for innovative custom prop uses or simply getting a friend round and using two trackers each to play a game.

    Also I'm wondering why in your post you say 'especially if using the omni along with it'?
  • OceanosOceanos Posts: 6
    edited July 2014
    @NobleBrutus‌

    I mention especially because without it, the built in walking function for the priovr causes some drift to occur, which would make it less desirable than the stem in that regard. But with an omnidirectional treadmill, no drift occurs, that's why its especially a better product when coupled with one (in other words any omnidirectional treadmill, doesn't have to be the omni specifically, technically the best option would actually be a strapless version but that would be more risky a.k.a. dangerous, as well as expensive). Also the extra sensors are less about function in a solo game and more about immersion in a social game, such as an online multiplayer one. The extra sensors allow you to physically socialize in a more realistic way, which will be very beneficial to immersion in a social setting. Ontop of that it provides all the key requirements already built in for the addition of gaming gloves that will add to immersion with finger movement, and allow you to use your body as well as hands in a realistic way for various actions or even just interacting with the virtual environment.

    I personally feel that the future of vr will essentially NEED such a full body immersion to be fully adopted by the general population instead of just hardcore gamers, to allow them to experience virtual worlds with friends, in a social setting, and make it feel similar with real life social interactions. Such things would even be of greater benefit if interacting with distant loved ones through the virtual world. Remember that body language (the subtle movements we physically make that express or mood or feelings), are a huge part of the subconscious social interaction.
  • RaoulRaoul Posts: 125
    You probably should not put too much faith in latency based on these demonstration videos. It is very likely that the video of the user has to be synchronized manually when editing in the captured game footage. Even when the user is standing in front of a TV screen there are a lot of variables that can effect perceived latency. The only true test for latency is trying it yourself in VR. Regardless neither the STEM nor PrioVR has their the final hardware yet. As long as we are looking at prototypes, tracking accuracy and latency can still vary dramatically with the actual product that ends up in our hands.

    What I'm more curious about is what you guys think the future of any of these systems will be, now that it seems likely Oculus will be developing their own motion control input. With the recent acquisition of the Carbon Design Group and Oculus dropping hints in recent interviews. It might even be the case we will see this launch bundled with CV1. In that case no matter how good any competing systems might be, it seems very unlikely they will be able to survive unless they offer a very compelling experience that far exceeds anything offered by Oculus.
Sign In or Register to comment.