>playstation Yeah, right. Good luck getting tolerable VR with a console. Good VR needs a high and consistent framerate. Most PS4 games still run at 30 FPS and even the ones that try to run at 60 can't hit it consistently.
Slowpoke here, just learned about the OR news and failed hard the compatibility test. When they say "recommended system", is it more like "upgrade or it's intolerable" or "upgrade is a big plus but can wait" ?
>>52513786 It comes with a small box, you connect it to the box, then the box to the PS4.
Also >.hack >They literally play [The World] With a dualshock controller and a VR headset >TFW if a new .hack comes out we'll be playing it in the exact same way the characters originally played it in the anime/manga
>>52513955 PC and console specs aren't really comparable. If you tried to run the witcher 3 for example on an AMD cat core APU you wouldn't even come close to matching the PS4/xbone performance with "similar" specs.
>>52514035 At what? PS4 runs PS4 games far more opitmized than PC runs PC games, why the fuck do you think games can look so good on such shitty hardware?
Power is not the same as performance anon, a PC has more power than a PS4 but pound for pound it doesn't perform better, PCs will always be horribly unoptimized until developers star getting hardware level access, which card manufacturers just recently started doing and its full of hudrles and issues at the moment.
>>52514081 >The sony vr thing will be cheaper. And unusably bad. If those are the minimum specs for the Oculus Rift, a PS4 does not even come close to delivering acceptable VR.
And those are the RECOMMENDED specs, not the minimum ones. You can go lower than that. A $600 machine will not give you a good VR experience, but you can use a $600 machine for VR and it will work better than a Playstation.
>>52514113 >At what? Playing games. The games are less optimized, but the hardware is SO much more powerful that it doesn't matter.
And it's better at everything else, too, since it's a proper computer.
>pound for pound it doesn't perform better Never say it did. I'm comparing a $600 machine to a $350 one. The PC is worse on performance/price, but you don't have to build a $1500 machine to beat a console.
>>52514156 The PC performs better. This is a simple fact. You're trying to make some theoretical argument that the PS4's superior optimization will make it perform better, but we know that that is simply not true. End of discussion.
>>52514181 PSVR was always the one big shot VR had of becoming mainstream, but now that the Oculus and Vive are angling themselves solely for the PC gaming 1% that buys 4K monitors and dual-titans and shit, it's looking to be the only chance most people have of play VR at all. Anons are working through their anxiety because they've been told for a year that the only way to pull off VR is with a $1000 supercomputer, even though most of the VR hype was built with the shitty DK1 and Google Cardboard, and even though the PSVR's prototype had a better reception than the Oculus DK2.
>>52514270 Not fucking likely this will go mainstream. It's better to have a respected high-end product that everyone lusts after than unusable mainstream garbage that turns people off the idea for good.
All these faggot posting shit without even knowing the reason it will have this price its because it will come with A EXTERNAL PROCESSING UNIT that will go in between the console and the VR gear,I've been waiting for a while now for the price,I was expecting 100$/€ less,but anyway
> I'll be buying it
Even if it comes next Christmas or whatever,the longer it takes the better because even if I save like 50 € a month by next winter I'll have the money
>>52514672 Perfect example. Much of the scene is inside the car and totally static. The protagonist does not move at all. There is fast movement, but it is in the distance. The limitations of the platform make it so movement much be very restricted.
>>52515303 Slowdowns have been a fact of life in video games since 2D side scrollers. Even arcade cabs fell victim to it. Some top down shooters could slow to a craw with enough action on screen, but no one complained about it. Whining about frame rate is a modern invention.
>>52514337 it doesn't run at 90fps, it runs at 60fps "reprojected" to 120fps, that's more or less what the video splitter box is for (as well as adding for vr or removing for tv the distortion to the video signal, they haven't said which it is doing yet)
can anyone explain to me how the ps camera is going to give actually good tracking? Like, it does decent for motion gaming, but I have my doubts it's doing 60hz tracking let alone 1000hz. It's not meant for this type of fast tracking, using off the shelf devices isn't really helping either.
ITT: Whiners whining about having to spend $1000 on a PC. In my day, we spent $1600 for a basic 'multimedia PC with CD-ROM' and we liked it. Oh and BTW, adjusted for inflation that's about $2900 of todays dollars.
Can't Jewbook essentially subsidize the Oculus into bargain territory? They have monies enough. If they lose 200$ per unit over what they'd normally earn, and they move 10 million in the first 12 months, that's still only 2bil lost, which should be drop in the bucket for them.
>>52518480 They dont have enough content to recoup that kind of loss. Thats the biggest worry for me. Its very underwhelming to have launch titles comprised of a 4 hour platformer and an arcade space shooter.
I hope someone has been working on a massive VR game thats ready to release by early 2017. Unlikely though. Best case scenario some existing games implementing good VR overhauls.
they could but what's the point? the target market for CV1 is still high end PCs, even if they gave it away for free most people won't be able to run it. Facebook's plan is long term, they're spending a shit ton on research, once VR reaches the point where everyone can run it they'll be swimming in money.
It makes much more sense to spend money on content for the first gen so people get excited about VR instead of selling a cheap headset with no content
>people say they cant run oculus >you can just lower the resolution like any other display >can most likely overclock the refresh rate at a lower res as well >use at a comfortable display setting and later down the road upgrade gpu to exceed requirements >next gen oculus will most likely be backwards compatible so it wont be an issue using current gen in the future just get oculus now and upgrade your gpu if needed later, gpu and cpu are gonna get much better in the near future.
yeah, but displays are only going to get better. i'm not talking software resolution, i'm talking actual native resolution. have you tried one of those phone-conversion VR sets? the oculus' resolution isn't that much higher and even with the best of the current-gen phone displays, pixelation is almost overbearing.
i'm a VR fuckboy so i need to have a first-gen, but for most people i'd be pretty hard-pressed to recommend it. human-native resolution is still a ways off, but in my opinion, i'd say around there is where VR starts to actually be "worth it."
>>52520975 I tried all 3 of the VRs at CES and the PSVR is actually surprisingly alright.
The graphics are pretty much PS3 era at this point so lots of room for improvement there, but the thing that matters is that the actual headset hardware i.e. motion tracking and screen quality works almost as well as the other two solutions. I don't think theyll have a problem selling it as long as it's priced around $400
>>52513915 those aren't the minimum specs, that's the upper limit to minimum specs oculus has set in order for games to be allowed on their store. so you won't see anything over that but a lot of the content will be well under that.
>>52520570 >i know nothing about the oculus rift and VR in general but will make statements that apply to traditional monitors and hope thats relevant! One, we are talking about displays very close to your eyes, resolution is going to be important unless you want it looking like playing games at 800x600 on a 1920x1080 monitor, you can do it but it doesn't look good. Two, I don't know what the refresh rate of the Oculus is but for a 90fps MINIMUM target to be effective we must be talking 120Hz refresh rate already, at least. Three, don't buy the fucking Oculus now unless you can meet the requirements. It isn't for you. Later down the road the headsets will be cheaper, and better, and the hardware required to drive it will be cheaper, and there will be more supported content. BUT YOU COVERED THAT IN FUCKING FOUR YOU CUNT. Don't get the Oculus now unless you can run it well, otherwise your opinion isn't wanted.
>>52514004 software optimization can only get you so far. its not magically going to make the PS4 more powerful. Plus a lot of the visual tricks they pull on consoles isn't going to fly on high res screens strapped to your face.
>>52514370 I've got a 1400 dollar computer, I run most games at max settings at hundreds of frames per second no problem, and I've gotta be honest, I have a hard time telling the different between 30 and 60 fps. Yeah, I can see a difference, but it's not enough to warrant panic.
>>52522792 The problem is that in VR high framerate helps alleviate the motion sickness that people tend to get with screens strapped to their faces, which is why 90FPS is the minimum goal for a good VR experience.
The fact that PS4 can't make constant 30FPS in 1080p (or even below) doesn't bode well for a good VR experience in top tier games, but then it's also likely to be limited to a handful of minigames anyway.
>>52521356 The PSVR uses reprojection, which means head motion is always rendered at 120hz no matter what, but the speed at which the actual game content moves can be as low as 60-90hz. It's a pretty clever trick that's always been used in games in a way, such as rendering motion at 60fps, but all canned animations or certain effects may only update every other frame. For global effects like bloom, you can even afford to update once every fourth frame if the game isn't very action-inclined.
>>52523025 Consoles were never limited in framerate or resolution. Wipeout Fury HD on the PS3 ran at 1080p60 and it even came out fairly early in the console's life. It didn't look great, but its futuristic art style worked to hide most of the rough edges.
As long as developers try to work on making games look good through art design and intelligent use of resources rather than brute-forcing everything, it's not unreasonable to expect them to hit the target. We lost a lot optimization with developers shifting from pre-baked detail in the last gen to making everything dynamic and generated in real time today, even in situations where it's not necessary.
>>52523120 The PSVR was revealed to come with a processor box that it tethers to, which means there will be a chip dedicated to scaling and warping image data to the headset. Hopefully artifacts will be kept to a minimum if they use good processing.
>>52523188 I honestly get dizzy trying to play normal gaems at 30 FPS. It just does not look like movement at all, more like some sort of ugly stop motion scene from an 80s movie and the eyestrain from trying to focus on that is just nasty.
>>52514465 >holy shit yuro has dropped since I last looked at the exchange rate They do it intentionally to help the export markets (= most of Europe). The goal is $=€. Loser are the consumers but companies get wet just thinking about it.
I'm calling it right now, sony will commit sudoku due to vr. Lawsuits everywhere due to motion sickness and damage to eye sight/perspective/mental status/whatever can be concocted. Even if they manage to pull of external components that will give more juice to the console, shit will hit the fan as consoles will turn into pcs that need upgrade. There is no escaping it, I just want to see how far the shit goes.
I don't care how shitty first gen VR headsets are going to be, I'm fucking excited as fuck for this.
Just looking at all the peripherals that are already being developed, like full body haptic suits and omnidirectional treadmills, makes me believe that we'll have immersive VR experiences like in Ready Player One within the next couple of years.
I can't wait. And none of you pessimistic fags can dampen my excitement either.
>>52523429 You can make a pretty decent looking game that barely needs any GPU power if you're willing to commit to a somewhat unusual content production process and the game world being 99.9% static; just look at id's Rage.
It could probably look much better now with consoles actually shipping with tolerable amounts of RAM usable for textures (= no need to instantly toss out everything the player can't see and show blurry textures for a moment when the player turns to look at something else). Their more modern GPUs could probably handle streaming with much more advanced compression algorithms, too.
Stuff like this could become much more common now that even top tier GPUs struggle with doing CryEngine-style "realtime everything" rendering at VR frame rates.
>>52523487 Idtech was a bad bad example, unreal engine would be a bettter example. Still regardless of how the hardware can handle the games, it comes down to how the game is designed/developed, which if we can take any hint at how it could be, it can't possibly be saved or consoles wouldn't still be at that current same place.
>>52523567 My point was that if we want games to run at VR tier framerates and still look good we're going to need to do less redundant work on each rendered frame. I just threw in Rage there because it probably has the most GPU-efficient (if completely static) 3D environments seen in gaming so far. The game could easily run smoothly on even shitty mobile hardware as long as it could decompress its streamed data fast enough.
Unreal Engine has been balancing realtime and precomputed/cached data for a while now; I'm not very familiar with UE4 but some of its features like the realtime-but-cached distance fields look impressive.
>>52523681 Just mentioned idtech as a horrible example due to the vsync problem and 60 fps engine lock that cannot be bypassed when with unreal you can cook and or stream practically everything without vsync issues nor locks.
>>52523776 The 60 FPS lock is probably just there to keep badly coded game mechanics, physics or something like that from failing like in e.g. Fallout 4. Wouldn't be surprised if the graphics themselves could run at like 300 FPS on a decent PC.
>>52523924 The megatexture streaming stuff was pretty impressive but you can tell he didn't have much vision beyond wanting to experiment with it and see how fast it can get.
Id's releases have always been a bit lopsided like this: some engine feature (probably whatever Carmack was interested in at the time) done really well, everything else left to the bare minimum. Just about every game based on the Quake engines had to implement its own animation system because the stock one was so primitive and had basically no support for moving things with N parts, etc. I think he even admitted on Twitter that he didn't really grasp transform hierarchies and other scene graph stuff for a long time.
>>52526012 The PS4 has exclusives that can't even maintain a solid 30, see Infamous Second Son, Bloodborne, Knack. Now this is fiiine if you really want particular exclusives, in a conventional setting you can probably stomach short dips to 20~fps. But even if you don't believe Oculus about the 90fps threshold, 30-60 is simply not enough.
In order to make an enthralling experience, PSVR games will need to be scaled way back graphically, the console was struggling to produce mediocre graphics in those aforementioned games as it is. There is a reason why Oculus' (and I assume Vive's) PC requirements are so high, because not only do they want that 90fps at high DPI, but they're expecting developers to go all the way in terms of graphics as well to complete the experience. I can't see how they can pull this out of a PS4 box, it leads me to think it's going to be a neat gimmick in a lot of games developed for it but it will never be immersive which will leave people disillusioned about VR.
>>52513701 Oculus rift is fucking expensive which sucks, but playing VR on a 400 dollar console is going to be a sub par experience there's no two ways about it, PS4 simply does not have the power to give true immersive VR. PSVR is the Wii of VR.
>>52514542 STOP BELIEVING THIS MEME, Having an external GPU/APU isn't currently viable to increase performance for VR. Remember latency is key when it comes to VR and having an external GPU increases latency.
>>52526343 I haven't tried any kind of VR, I will not lie. However I find frame dips below 60fps jarring even on a monitor, I can't imagine seeing that kind of thing at a low resolution mere centimetres from my face will be effective for convincing me I'm there.
>>52526431 i just don't get it anon, how the fuck can a company sell face monitors there's almost zero benefit maybe head tracking? idk man I feel like a right analog stick will always be better its just straight gimicky bullshit
>>52526463 Why would Sony invest in making good games for PSVR when the PS4 proved they could sell record hardware numbers without compelling software to back it up? Are you really just taking their word for it when they say they've opened up their own studios for VR, that their games are going to be amazing by default?
>>52526463 Yeah just like the kinect had a "huge" lineup of burger king shovel ware happy meal tier bullshit 25 cent bubble gum games where you can pet your cat or listen to molyneux talk about his imaginary ai boy toy. or like every recent nintendo console minus the handhelds and smash bros or like gaystations glowing dildos whos only game was some generic navy seal shooter with a $60 gun accessories that you could strap your glowing dildo too or the ds4s built in motion sensor used in 2 games
>>52526482 Head tracking is actually really appealing to me, VR immersion shit aside it could actually introduce a lot of inferred mechanics to things like shooters. >right analog >good for looking around >not a mouse wew but meming aside, the point of the head tracking aside from making you feel inside the game is that you can control where you're looking independent of where you're facing/your hands are pointed. Currently that's not really something games attempt, it offers little gameplay benefit and is over the top to expect a player to manage all 3 of those movement inputs simultaneously. But with head tracking you don't have to think about it at all, you just look where you want.
>>52526509 I'm not going to pretend to be an expert, but isn't what you're saying is that the headset does interpolation to manage a higher perceived framerate? If so, that's not great... Interpolation introduces inherrent latency because you need both frames to create the fake middle frame. With head tracking, additional latency caused by this sort of thing would likely be very uncomfortable. Correct me if I'm wrong though.
>>52526496 No, what I'm saying is that Sony has complete vertical control over PSVR. They have undoubtedly worked with devs to make their lives easier - that's why so many devs are making games for it already. The games might be shit, who knows - but they won't be unplayable or sickness inducing like /g/ is suggesting.
>>52526532 I'll grant you the Kinect being a bit of a flop - but the Wii and Wii U have hosted some of the most fantastic games for the past two gens and have also made Nintendo a considerable sum of money.
>but Vita >amazing hardware >unhackable since Sony used the PS3 and PSP as a playground to make invincible software >basically a pretty paperweight since there are no good games Is this VR thing going to be usable with a computer or just the PS4? I'd probably get one if I can actually use it for something, and if Sony doesn't actually let people do shit then no one will be able to get it to work with a PC.
>>52526550 This. Head tracking is awesome. I used an open source version of track ir in arma 2 that tracked a single led on a baseball cap. It was awesome to be able to look around without changing my aim.
>>52528910 or all will all die because people just don't care (they don't solve any job that needed solving)
i can see a definite niche interest, but that would just result in a content death spiral (a small base of upmarket consumers = not financially justifiable to create high quality content = no high quality content, the number of upmarket consumers shrinks = even less content, etc)
i think VR is a cool gadget but try justifying to your mom why she needs it
>>52528949 I can see it being used in educational purposes, training n shit Of course it's not going to be a household item, but if shit like SMART 3D TVs catch on on retard easily with marketing these days, they can sell VR too, especially seeing at the companies that make them: FB is probably the best advertisement there could ever be for normies, Steam is a hard hitter for "gaming enthusiasts" and just mainly anyone who has a powerful enough PC. I don't count on Sony doing anything useful ever, so I don't care about that one Also VR could be done as easily as an expensive, but a popular to have phone and cardboard box or a more expensive plastic box, which is going to be popular as shit, essentially a household item owned by anyone and everyone
>>52529031 I don't really know how holograms work, but I assume so does everyone else, but could they give a haptic feedback ? Soundwaves can be produced by VR, AR or just any headset or any other shit, nothing impressive, the only advantage I see to holograms is that everyone sees the same thing at the same time without requiring any additional equipment for each person
People talking about ps4 hardware, has specs been released? They might have stuck a gpu/cpu and ram inside the headset. I think the holo lens does this right? Or there's the headset and like, a gpu brick (like xbone a power brick).
>>52529474 Anon I'm not suggesting there's a 980ti in there, but a gpu and ram that would work with the ps4 hardware. Think about it, the ps4 is already 400 bucks, all they have to do is use the same hardware in that, in headset, and or box like i said. think of it like the progression of laptops and phones.
Again, I didn't say that they did, but they could have
When will the VR Meme be over? Everyone knows it's not going to catch on at all
For VR to really catch on and become big we'd need to completely revamp the whole goddamn internet infrastructure to make it fast enough,have better signals and have enough bandwidth so we can stream shit to people directly to their headset
Nobody wants to be tethered to a Computer or Console when using the thing
It's going to be fucking shit >but the consoles are far more optimized!!11 The current playstation literally runs on x86 PC hardware, there's not much to "optimize" except to scale down the graphics for newer games
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.