Please show us these “facts and demos and reviews”…What you’re explicitly saying is absolute rubbish.
As Roadtovr mentioned, the team was indeed trying to make the FOV even larger with v5. Issues occurred during the trials and we are working hard to fix them. Thank you @Axacuatl for the issue summary. Backers, welcome to raise all types of suggestions, we believe we will make it right when it comes to the final product.
10 Likes
Facts:
- look at how their stand looks like.
- look at how the sensors from HMD have been covered
- the actual experience seems worse than in version 3
- one guy asked if he can adjust the IPD. HE WAS REPLYED THAT THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED.
NOT ALLOWED !!! By who ? This single statement is suspect like hell.
Would you present your product like this in the most important event of the year ?
Better stayed home.
That’s why I am saying they did it deliberately.
1 Like
Dear @deletedpimaxrep1, you guys are doing it AGAIN! Why?
If you did in fact try and expand the FOV going to v5 and these are the issues with the prototype that are being shown to the entire global VR community, why on earth did you not a) share this with your community BEFORE the show, b) take a serious look at if showing up in this state actually HELPS Pimax as a company and c) brief your staff at the show to highlight to the press that these issues with optics are the result of bleeding edge R&D and will be remedied?
Also, please let us know what is going on with tracking. This should have most definitely been sorted out by now, if we as backers are not being taken for a ride.
1 Like
But the first impression is already spoiled.
Very little information about v5, and what began to appear, it seems negative.
We are starting to get nervous. You need someone for public relations, you start to move away from us. We do not feel feedback.
All of these can be answered by admitting that Pimax is an amateur setup who simply weren’t able to do better.
I’m sorry, but that explanation is way simpler and makes more sense than your convoluted consipracy theory.
Stand looks messy because apparently they didn’t prepare it professionally.
Sensors being covered was an R&D goal and IR transparent material isn’t hard to get by.
The experience seems worse as their push from v3 to v5 apparently went completely wrong.
Staff wasn’t allowed to adjust IPD because it might be implemented physically, but most likely isn’t yet supported in sw.
1 Like
None of that is a fact that Pimax have been paid to fail. Again I’ll ask you to show me the facts that Pimax have been paid to fail.
Xunshu , Then there is one thing I do not understand, what was the purpose of showing the v5 at CES?
3 Likes
You are perfectly right. We all agree with that, they are amateurs and don’t have anything at hand.
Then why CES ? What else are they doing there except showing this absolute horible thing.
The damage they did being there is magnitudes order higher then if they stayed at home pretending they missed the airplane.
2 Likes
“Get feedback”
But what if there are problems about which they already knew.
If they were not paid for fail, what was the purpose of the 14 million dollar support ?
Answer this question.
They are still to release a final product. They have closed both their Kickstarter campaign and a round of private funding.
So what damage has exactly been done?
The only thing that matters in the end is the final product. That will go out to testers, reviewers and backers and their opinions will be what matters and what creates buzz and a market push for the product or if it’s not good it will fail.
how about you learn to read…
2 Likes
With each new prototype, the thing goes backwards instead of moving forward.
@deletedpimaxrep1 I think you need to do a poll of your backers, I would imagine most of us would rather have a smaller FOV if it means a significantly better SDE situation, causing these issues by trying to go bigger on FOV was an unnecessary risk for CES
6 Likes
Do you not understand how business and private equity markets work? Private Equity Explained With Examples and Ways to Invest
If it was money paid to get them to fail do you really think it would have been made public? No it would have been under the table money.
And when will we have this final product?
After these horrifing hands-on from road2vr, I do noch expect anything before the last quarter of this year! Sad but I´m afraid we have to wait many month!
1 Like
So, in your opinion, what do you think those who invested capital in Pimax have to say now ?
Or , another way, don’t you think Pimax would have done everything possible to fulfill the investors expectations ?
What did they do instead ? Or better, what do you think was the investors goal ?
My supposiotion is that the investors goal was to protect their other investments. Pimax is a nuissance.
But that’s me, I don’t try to convince others, but keep in mind , this is a multibillion market, a lot is going on under the table
100% agreed.
Before any of the Pimax White Knights chime in here (I’m looking at you @Heliosurge) I want to make perfectly clear that I really do feel for these guys.
They shot for the moon, they got amazing funding, great press and really were put on a pedestal they couldn’t hope to stay on without delivering what they had promised within the ridiculous timeframe that they had set themselves.
So now you have issues in R&D which is normal and part of the process, but you also commited serious capital to appear on the global stage at CES and a community that given their sizable investment is scrutinizing every bit of information to get their hands on. That is a very difficult position to be in and one that the majority of small companies do not recover from.
Add to that what I consider to be deep-rooted cultural differences between mostly Western backers and a Chinese company and this is the result we see:
Non-functional hardware that is being reported on by the global VR press.
I do very much hope I’m wrong, but this could definitely be the end of the road for Pimax in the high-end VR segment.
7 Likes