I'd go so far as to say 144hz at 144 fps should be the bare minimum. And that's not even factoring in stuff like screen door effect, latency issues, etc etc. All of which play a part.
The Quest 2 has pretty much eliminated the screen door. I've never had any issues at 90/90, but sensitive people might. The higher the better really. I hate saying it, because I despise Facebook, but the headset is actually really good, especially if you use it through Steam Link. Comparable headsets are 2-3x as much money.
I legitimately never thought twice about them because I thought you could only play shitty Facebook games with them, but you can play real games on Steam? How are the controllers?
For the Quest 2, the ideal setup is a dedicated (but inexpensive) router for wireless communicating with the headset. Last I looked a few specific models of semi-generic $50 routers were tested by the community.
Then you can either run your PC lan connection through that router or if you have a second Ethernet connection, use one just for that router.
Good to know. They don't have cameras you put around the room right? How is the tracking? I worry about it losing tracking a lot when the controllers aren't in view.
It uses inside-out tracking, but I haven't had any issues with it. If you move your hand out of view, it knows that you did so and will just make it disappear and reappear when it moves back into view.
No base stations required. If you hold your controller behind your back you will lose tracking as it uses cameras on the headset to track it. Hasn't really been an issue for me though.
I had the original HTC Vive before my wife gave me the Oculus Quest 2 for Christmas last year. The Quest 2 is good enough that I gave the Vive to my son and just kept the Quest 2. The resolution is much clearer on the Quest, and the tracking is very good too.
One of the very cool things about the Quest 2 is that it's a stand-alone device, so for native games you can play it in your kitchen, or backyard, or anywhere with a lot of room. There are several titles that have been ported to the Oculus store for the Quest, and they're on-par with their Steam equivalents.
Of course the performance won't be as good as a full-blown gaming computer, so I usually play through the Steam Link, using a 35 foot USB-C cable. Another benefit to the cable is that it charges the headset while you're playing, so you aren't limited to 2 hour sessions. I've probably played 100 hours in Elite Dangerous using the Steam Link and it's beautiful, smooth, and near flawless. My WiFi router is pretty far from my game room, so I haven't had much luck with the WiFi Steam Link, but some people seem to have had success with it based on what I've read on a bunch of Reddit posts.
When I got the Quest 2 you could still use your Oculus account to log in, but now they require that you merge it with your Facebook account, which is really annoying. That's the only thing I dislike about the Quest, that you need a Facebook account. But you can turn off sync, and it doesn't post to Facebook, or share your gaming history, or anything like that. I haven't launched or even looked at the metaverse, because it doesn't interest me at all, and it's decoupled enough that it's pretty much a non-issue once you get over the fact that a Facebook account is required. You'd have to spend another $500-$1000 for an equivalent device that doesn't require Facebook.
It's not that simple though. At any frame rate or frame time, you can still experience the movement disconnect.
Simulating a roller coaster while sitting still will make the brain think you are moving while all other sensory perception says no, and you get nauseous.
Same as sea, air and car sickness, and those all have pretty great FPS.
That's true, but when it drops below 90/90 you're a lot more likely to experience motion sickness from something as simple as looking around. With the higher frame rates, the motion is perceived more naturally by the brain, and you're a lot less likely to become nauseous. For the games more intense movement, where your perceived movement is disconnected from your actual movement, you can get used to it eventually, as long as your system is pushing enough information to your eyes. I have a top of the line gaming computer and I could only play very short sessions of Elite Dangerous when I started, since the perception is that you're in a spaceship that's flipping and spinning all around. After several short sessions, my brain started adapting until I could play for hours on end.
I mean… it's also the fact you can move in the game while sitting down or standing still IRL. The framerate isn't going to affect that inner ear/brain disconnect that causes motion sickness. Get a viable, and affordable, omnidirectional treadmill out and that would be a big help.
If the game, experience, or whatever breaches that minimum frame time frequently, then you can experience nausea just from moving your head around.
It does require some sacrifices like turning shadows down a notch or two in some game engines and choosing additional visual effects carefully. Some visual effects require additional computation passes and can add the the frame time.
A low latency CPU (like the AMD 3D cache CPUs) or a normal mid to high end CPU with fast memory with good timings helps quite a bit.
The GPU should be capable of pushing the pixels and shading for the target resolution. Even with a 6900xt I've been able to comfortably push over 4500x3000 per eye rendering (enough to get a nice anti-aliasimg effect on my Pimax 8kX at the "normal" 150 degree H.FoV) in most games.
Surprisingly, fidelity FX can help as well (the non-temporal version).
It's very simple. The device needs to maintain 90fps at 90hz minimum. Anything below that can cause nausea. We've known this since at least 2017.
I'd go so far as to say 144hz at 144 fps should be the bare minimum. And that's not even factoring in stuff like screen door effect, latency issues, etc etc. All of which play a part.
The Quest 2 has pretty much eliminated the screen door. I've never had any issues at 90/90, but sensitive people might. The higher the better really. I hate saying it, because I despise Facebook, but the headset is actually really good, especially if you use it through Steam Link. Comparable headsets are 2-3x as much money.
I legitimately never thought twice about them because I thought you could only play shitty Facebook games with them, but you can play real games on Steam? How are the controllers?
Yup! You can use the Steam Link and play all of the Steam VR games you already own. You can either use a long USB-C cable, or WiFi 6.
For the Quest 2, the ideal setup is a dedicated (but inexpensive) router for wireless communicating with the headset. Last I looked a few specific models of semi-generic $50 routers were tested by the community.
Then you can either run your PC lan connection through that router or if you have a second Ethernet connection, use one just for that router.
Huh… This is pretty clever…
Very cool!
They are great. I have a mate who has an index and regularly has issues with controller config playing games on steam. I've had none with my quest 2.
Good to know. They don't have cameras you put around the room right? How is the tracking? I worry about it losing tracking a lot when the controllers aren't in view.
It uses inside-out tracking, but I haven't had any issues with it. If you move your hand out of view, it knows that you did so and will just make it disappear and reappear when it moves back into view.
No base stations required. If you hold your controller behind your back you will lose tracking as it uses cameras on the headset to track it. Hasn't really been an issue for me though.
Okay, I had to ask because my only experience is with the Vive and I was impressed with it's tracking via the stations.
I had the original HTC Vive before my wife gave me the Oculus Quest 2 for Christmas last year. The Quest 2 is good enough that I gave the Vive to my son and just kept the Quest 2. The resolution is much clearer on the Quest, and the tracking is very good too.
One of the very cool things about the Quest 2 is that it's a stand-alone device, so for native games you can play it in your kitchen, or backyard, or anywhere with a lot of room. There are several titles that have been ported to the Oculus store for the Quest, and they're on-par with their Steam equivalents.
Of course the performance won't be as good as a full-blown gaming computer, so I usually play through the Steam Link, using a 35 foot USB-C cable. Another benefit to the cable is that it charges the headset while you're playing, so you aren't limited to 2 hour sessions. I've probably played 100 hours in Elite Dangerous using the Steam Link and it's beautiful, smooth, and near flawless. My WiFi router is pretty far from my game room, so I haven't had much luck with the WiFi Steam Link, but some people seem to have had success with it based on what I've read on a bunch of Reddit posts.
When I got the Quest 2 you could still use your Oculus account to log in, but now they require that you merge it with your Facebook account, which is really annoying. That's the only thing I dislike about the Quest, that you need a Facebook account. But you can turn off sync, and it doesn't post to Facebook, or share your gaming history, or anything like that. I haven't launched or even looked at the metaverse, because it doesn't interest me at all, and it's decoupled enough that it's pretty much a non-issue once you get over the fact that a Facebook account is required. You'd have to spend another $500-$1000 for an equivalent device that doesn't require Facebook.
It's not that simple though. At any frame rate or frame time, you can still experience the movement disconnect. Simulating a roller coaster while sitting still will make the brain think you are moving while all other sensory perception says no, and you get nauseous.
Same as sea, air and car sickness, and those all have pretty great FPS.
That's true, but when it drops below 90/90 you're a lot more likely to experience motion sickness from something as simple as looking around. With the higher frame rates, the motion is perceived more naturally by the brain, and you're a lot less likely to become nauseous. For the games more intense movement, where your perceived movement is disconnected from your actual movement, you can get used to it eventually, as long as your system is pushing enough information to your eyes. I have a top of the line gaming computer and I could only play very short sessions of Elite Dangerous when I started, since the perception is that you're in a spaceship that's flipping and spinning all around. After several short sessions, my brain started adapting until I could play for hours on end.
I mean… it's also the fact you can move in the game while sitting down or standing still IRL. The framerate isn't going to affect that inner ear/brain disconnect that causes motion sickness. Get a viable, and affordable, omnidirectional treadmill out and that would be a big help.
Frametimes is the specific measure.
<11.1ms for 90Hz or <8.33ms for 120Hz
If the game, experience, or whatever breaches that minimum frame time frequently, then you can experience nausea just from moving your head around.
It does require some sacrifices like turning shadows down a notch or two in some game engines and choosing additional visual effects carefully. Some visual effects require additional computation passes and can add the the frame time.
A low latency CPU (like the AMD 3D cache CPUs) or a normal mid to high end CPU with fast memory with good timings helps quite a bit.
The GPU should be capable of pushing the pixels and shading for the target resolution. Even with a 6900xt I've been able to comfortably push over 4500x3000 per eye rendering (enough to get a nice anti-aliasimg effect on my Pimax 8kX at the "normal" 150 degree H.FoV) in most games.
Surprisingly, fidelity FX can help as well (the non-temporal version).