Support NeoGAF

[Tams]

 

[mrmustard]

It's a highend piece of technology and well worth the price. No question about that. My only concern is how many eye-candy games will we see that make full use of it and how many will we see that could easily run on a Quest 2 or Pico 4. Also games like Resident Evil that are made VR compatible are nice, but the real deal are games that are made for VR from the beginning.

I think 4-5 games at the same quality like Half Life Alyx are necessary to make this a success with a higher attach rate than 5%.

 

[ToTTenTranz]

I think Carmack is underestimating the platform's growth potential if Sony commits with their 1st party studios.

I'm not getting a PSVR2 because the value proposition isn't great at the moment, but if Sony adds a PSVR2 mode on all their future PS5 1st party games and get a number of 3rd parties to do the same, playing in VR could quickly become the favorite method of playing games to many people.

The PSVR1 had the worst hardware of the bunch and it still got to be the most popular headset at the time.
At the moment, PSVR2 has the best hardware.

 

[Reallink]

Samsung VR, Quest 1, Quest 2, so 3.

Index and PSVR both outsold Quest 1 based on available metrics (see Steam Survey and SLR's users by headset breakdown). Gear VR was just a phone holder, the vast majority of which Samsung gave away for free for buying their phones. Oculus Go was well below Q1, and Q1 itself was only middlingly successful. It never even played in the same stadium as Quest 2 which is a near Wii level phenomenon. The fact that a $1000 headset (Index) which required a minimum $1000 PC to run manages to chart at all in userbase breakdowns tells you the importance of real AAA games from S-tier development teams.

 

[Lasha]

This is just not true. And quite frankly a purposeful myopic way took at things to make a case.

And again...... beginning to feel like a broken record here... subjective.

I do not pay for PS+ anything to pay online, I pay for it for the games I can get. And I get a ton. I only honestly buy 6-8 games a year. And even at that, I seldom ever buy at launch price even though Iamadigita. That usually means that I wait until most games get their first discount before actually buying with the exception of 2/3 games a year. At times I am waiting so long that I end up never actually buying them and just getting them on PS+ if they become available. I know of people that do not even buy anything period and what they have done since last year is just pay for PS+.

Point is, it's subjective.

And fuck the comparison he seems to be making.... be it PSVR or VR on a PC, either way, you are gonna be over $1k on average when it's said on done, NO ONE.... absolutely NO ONE is looking at VR because they think it's cheap or a bargain. A VR needs is the right game...or the right kinda porn implementation, or preferably both. And watch its sales skyrocket.

Every purchase is subjective. The discussion is about the price of PSVR potentially affecting the rate of its adoption. The type of person who spends a grand is already a niche. PSVR's price targets that segment of the market where you can spend around the same and have access to two VR libraries and a solid mid-range PC that can perform on par or better than a console. Personal decisions are subjective but price is usually a significant motivator when considering similar goods. I think PSVR would be way more attractive if Sony could somehow get everything bundled together for $600. That puts it in a better position to compete with the Quest since the utility and value would be in Sony's favor.

 

[Team Andromeda]

Price isn't the issue (people will always find money if you make it a must have) Its SONY's commitment to supporting the unit with its BIG AAA In-House blockbusters and studios and its looks for all the world, its going to fair no better than VR on the PS4 on that front.

 

[hlm666]

Huh?

If they hadn’t developed it with VR to begin with it wouldn’t have been “easy”

Cockpit sims are the easiest to port to VR. Elite dangerous wasn't made with VR in mind and the that got implemented quickly. So many pc cockpit sims came out without VR and nearly all have the feature now days. Assetto Corsa wasn't made with VR in mind and yet it was added quickly once VR started to become popular for sims, and it doesn't appear to have caused it's VR mode any negative effects.



Seeing this is a Carmack thread aswell.

You are also discounting console efficiencies and foveated rendering allowing consoles to perform well above an equivalent PC spec

fixed foveated rendering has been being used for years and carmack doesn't think that eye tracked FR is useful as we keep hearing either.

 

[Drizzlehell]

I think point of the matter is, based on the specs, it's a reasonable price point, especially those looking to enter VR for the first time (myself included). Aren't the other VR hardware out there is double in cost, yet I hear no complaints about them?

It's not a reasonable price point if you want to introduce more people to VR. In fact, it's the complete opposite. Especially after you factor in additional costs of the console and games.

Also, he said the same about Quest 2 Pro price.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Every purchase is subjective. The discussion is about the price of PSVR potentially affecting the rate of its adoption. The type of person who spends a grand is already a niche. PSVR's price targets that segment of the market where you can spend around the same and have access to two VR libraries and a solid mid-range PC that can perform on par or better than a console. Personal decisions are subjective but price is usually a significant motivator when considering similar goods. I think PSVR would be way more attractive if Sony could somehow get everything bundled together for $600. That puts it in a better position to compete with the Quest since the utility and value would be in Sony's favor.

Couldn't agree more.

I just believe that VR is forever going to be a niche product until as say you can get a headset and the hardware to drive it for as you said... around $600. But until that happens, it wi always be a niche product. The same way the OG PSVR was..and even that managed to push over 6M units. Its a marathon, not a sprint. I expect that by the time the dust settles, PSVR2 would have pushed out over 5M units too.

And look at what sony is doing, PSVR2 does not cost $550 to make, they have to be making a profit on each unit sod. That's done to insulate themselves, look at the billions Meta is losing.

And this is the most important bit, they aren't and don't need to be competing with the quest. Being that as far as consoles go, the only way you can get VR is with a PS5. If the quest suddenly starts supporting Xbox consoles, then that's a totally different matter. And if that were the case, I can guarantee you that PSVR2 wouldn't be priced at over $399.

I really do feel that when looking at niche premium products, the pricing just tends to go out the window. I mean,if I have a PS5, and a laptop... one of those netbook things... I am not going to build a PC and buy a VR headset just to do VR. At this point, my cheapest entry into VR is a PS5. Kinda...

It's not a reasonable price point if you want to introduce more people to VR. In fact, it's the complete opposite. Especially after you factor in additional costs of the console and games.

Also, he said the same about Quest 2 Pro price.

I don't think there is such a thing as a reasonable price point for anything VR. Including that $350 quest. If you want to get the most out of that, you still need a PC.

 

[Ic3man]

VR is still a thing? LMAO

 

[midnightAI]

It's a highend piece of technology and well worth the price. No question about that. My only concern is how many eye-candy games will we see that make full use of it and how many will we see that could easily run on a Quest 2 or Pico 4. Also games like Resident Evil that are made VR compatible are nice, but the real deal are games that are made for VR from the beginning.

I think 4-5 games at the same quality like Half Life Alyx are necessary to make this a success with a higher attach rate than 5%.

After the success of Resident Evil 7, Resident Evil Village would have had VR in mind while they was developing it the same as how they had VR in mind while developing GT7 from the start.

I'd argue you already have 3 games of Alyx quality at launch (Horizon, GT7 and Resident Evil Village) if not greater, certainly graphically.

 

[Hexxus]

This headsets future wouldn't look bleak if Sony had the foresight to make it functional on PC. They don't even need to make their games for PCVR, the fact that the headset isn't makes it a non-purchase for me.

If it worked on both I would buy a PlayStation 5 and use it to experience VR both on PS5 and PC. Given that it's not though my money will only go into PC. I'm not buying two headsets and the PS5 console itself isn't a great enough value proposition on its own for me to purchase it.

 

[midnightAI]

fixed foveated rendering has been being used for years and carmack doesn't think that's a useful as we keep hearing either.

Performance isnt just about how many polys you can push, performance is also image quality.

Dynamic foveated rendering is (perceived) high resolution across the screen, fixed foveated rendering is using much lower resolution towards the edges of the display, in fact, Carmack actually (kinda) contradicts himself a bit here as he also recommends that fixed foveated rendering is done at low/medium settings which is less performant



So with dynamic foveated rendering you can be more aggressive about how much lower the resolution can get so you can gain more performance.

Think of it this way, a 3060 gains you no more performance over a 1080..... if the 1080 if 3/4 of the screen is being rendered at quarter resolution

 

[hlm666]

Dynamic foveated rendering is (perceived) high resolution across the screen, fixed foveated rendering is using much lower resolution towards the edges of the display, in fact, Carmack actually contradicts himself a bit here as he also recommends that fixed foveated rendering is done at low/medium settings which is less performant

Your not going to be looking into the edges of your field of view with fresnel lens and getting a good visual experience anyway, majority of people will be turning their head to get the lens sweet spot over what they are looking at if it's important. The good news is apparently because of privacy concerns eye tracking can be turned off on the psvr2 and quest pro so we might get some actually performance metrics on vs off in the future and find out if carmack is right or not.

 

[Black_Stride]

As soon as PC drivers are made for this thing, it will absolutely fly off the shelves.

Im not even heavily into VR but if I find out someone has made drivers for it.....im spending dem dollars.

I gave Sony money for a DualSense even when I didnt have a PS5.
If drivers come out im giving Sony money again for a PSVR2 even if I still dont have a PS5.

 

[scydrex]

My PC 5800x and 6900xt cost a little over $1000, my Quest 2 was a $250 official refurb plus $20 for a decent strap and $10 for virtual desktop. So slightly more expensive up front, but will quickly even out due to much cheaper software (thank you humble bundle) and gamepass games.
PSVR2 is obviously better for visual quality but you do lose the wireless experience.

I imagine the thing is building a PC in my country is more expensive than in the USA or than getting a PS5 or Xbox S/X

 

[midnightAI]

Your not going to be looking into the edges of your field of view with fresnel lens and getting a good visual experience anyway, majority of people will be turning their head to get the lens sweet spot over what they are looking at if it's important. The good news is apparently because of privacy concerns eye tracking can be turned off on the psvr2 and quest pro so we might get some actually performance metrics on vs off in the future and find out if carmack is right or not.

Not all fresnel lenses are made equally, in fact, hands on with PSVR 2 suggests that the screen is clear across the display (mostly), with no god rays (or at least nowhere near as obvious) and only slight CA (Sony also has a patent to try and lower the god ray issue: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2022...od-to-fix-god-rays-in-vr-headsets-like-psvr2/)

I haven't heard you can turn off eye tracking on PSVR 2 (some games even require it, blink at least)? either way, even if you can it will just go back to FFR so not sure what performance metrics can be gained from that and as I have said, there isnt a massive difference (if any) if the quality settings are the same (high FFR will be the same as high DFR, the difference is DFR looks better across the display as mentioned)

 

[RJMacready73]

Well, yeah. It requires a 500-dollar console and a 500+ dollar VR set.

That's a lot of money for a gimmick experience.

since when was full fat GT7, Resident Evil 8, No mans Sky & Horizon been thought of as a gimmick experience? what fucking planet are you on lad.

Seeing as Sony built such an incredible headset, you'd think at some point they'd release it for PC to help drive sales of the hardware to cover costs

 

[Tams]

Every purchase is subjective. The discussion is about the price of PSVR potentially affecting the rate of its adoption. The type of person who spends a grand is already a niche. PSVR's price targets that segment of the market where you can spend around the same and have access to two VR libraries and a solid mid-range PC that can perform on par or better than a console. Personal decisions are subjective but price is usually a significant motivator when considering similar goods. I think PSVR would be way more attractive if Sony could somehow get everything bundled together for $600. That puts it in a better position to compete with the Quest since the utility and value would be in Sony's favor.

 

[Portugeezer]

No shit, and Sony should have learned with their first experiment. VR has its applications its useful for, but “mainstream gaming” will never be one of them. its niche at best.

They clearly think VR has a place, otherwise they wouldn't do it.

Still, I think Sony should allow it to be compatible with PC, or if anything, not try to block PC access.

 

[kruis]

Price isn't the issue (people will always find money if you make it a must have) Its SONY's commitment to supporting the unit with its BIG AAA In-House blockbusters and studios and its looks for all the world, its going to fair no better than VR on the PS4 on that front.

At most you'll get smaller AA games or first person AAA games with an added VR mode. Those are the cheapest to make. Sony will not invest in AAA games that are PSVR only, they'll never make back that investment considering the expected small user base.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

since when was full fat GT7, Resident Evil 8, No mans Sky & Horizon been thought of as a gimmick experience? what fucking planet are you on lad.

Seeing as Sony built such an incredible headset, you'd think at some point they'd release it for PC to help drive sales of the hardware to cover costs

are they even making a profit on the hardware?

 

[DenchDeckard]

all we can do is see how its going. We should havea good idea within a few months and deffo by the end of the year.

 

[scydrex]

This is just not true. And quite frankly a purposeful myopic way took at things to make a case.

And again...... beginning to feel like a broken record here... subjective.

I do not pay for PS+ anything to pay online, I pay for it for the games I can get. And I get a ton. I only honestly buy 6-8 games a year. And even at that, I seldom ever buy at launch price even though Iamadigita. That usually means that I wait until most games get their first discount before actually buying with the exception of 2/3 games a year. At times I am waiting so long that I end up never actually buying them and just getting them on PS+ if they become available. I know of people that do not even buy anything period and what they have done since last year is just pay for PS+.

Point is, it's subjective.

And fuck the comparison he seems to be making.... be it PSVR or VR on a PC, either way, you are gonna be over $1k on average when it's said on done, NO ONE.... absolutely NO ONE is looking at VR because they think it's cheap or a bargain. A VR needs is the right game...or the right kinda porn implementation, or preferably both. And watch its sales skyrocket.

Me 2. I paid plus for the games. I don't play online. Last year with extra i played Death Stranding, Ghost of Tsushima, Demon Souls, Returnal and Miles Morales. I saved US$219 for playing those game on extra. If i want to own any of those games will buy them when they are cheaper. For essential they gave Star Wars Fallen Order and i sold my physical copy for US$22. They gave Tony Hawk and sold my copy for US$14. Wanted to buy Yakuza Like a Dragon and they gave it for essential. Also they put Devil May Cry 5 for extra and played it too. So IDK what is that guy thalking about... i rare play online.

 

[Team Andromeda]

At most you'll get smaller AA games or first person AAA games with an added VR mode. Those are the cheapest to make. Sony will not invest in AAA games that are PSVR only, they'll never make back that investment considering the expected small user base.

And that's the trouble SONY will not have its In-House teams making big AAA exclusives. Like I said before, its very much like SEGA and the Mega CD. The big projects will be base unit only

 

[RJMacready73]

At most you'll get smaller AA games or first person AAA games with an added VR mode. Those are the cheapest to make. Sony will not invest in AAA games that are PSVR only, they'll never make back that investment considering the expected small user base.

That's doesn't bother me, I don't need built for VR only, beat saber etc bore the shit out me, no interest, give me your AAA first person games with that added option to play in VR and I'm happy, wishful thinking is for the likes of Uncharted & TLOU, Assassin's Creed etc to offer a "VR explore" mode, let me walk around your incredible levels and admire the design and artwork..

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Now THAT would be a great move. A dedicated VR category, could try out the day 1 strategy and throw in the whole library in there for the Premium tier and see what happens.

But as it is right now I think it’ll be the same old broken waiting game as with any other new platform. The masses are waiting for games and the publishers are waiting for the masses. And a tight group of enthusiasts will jump in early and think it’s the best thing since sliced bread but will drop out eventually because of lack of AAA games and get old and cranky like me.

Sony is going to drive this at least initially with some key 3rd parties for at least 2 years.

 

[mrmustard]

After the success of Resident Evil 7, Resident Evil Village would have had VR in mind while they was developing it the same as how they had VR in mind while developing GT7 from the start.

I'd argue you already have 3 games of Alyx quality at launch (Horizon, GT7 and Resident Evil Village) if not greater, certainly graphically.

It's still a difference if a game is 100% made for VR like Horizon. Alyx quality will be hard for all 3, i think it's 94 or so Meta + User Score. GT7 is the most promising, then Horizon and then RE ( not a fan of Village). Guess we have to wait and see how it turns out.

 

[pasterpl]

That's assuming a linear relationship, which in business is almost always not the case.

Yeah, that’s why I have included scenario where attachment rate increases almost 2x (guesstimate, how likely it is we will see but with the inflation, interest rates rising, massive layoffs etc. might be tricky to achieve).

 

[midnightAI]

It's still a difference if a game is 100% made for VR like Horizon. Alyx quality will be hard for all 3, i think it's 94 or so Meta + User Score. GT7 is the most promising, then Horizon and then RE ( not a fan of Village). Guess we have to wait and see how it turns out.

Hmmm, I'd argue that point, I think so long as its developed in conjunction with the flat screen version then I don't see any reason why these types of games couldn't be the very pinnacle of AAA VR and should be no less quality that games just developed for VR only in fact if anything it could increase immersion in regular games because the tendency when doing VR is to model everything properly (no shortcuts) so items can be viewed from all angles and also more physics is usually added to items also (so no more baskets of fruit that is just a single low poly mesh inside the basket, instead there is a basket full of individual fruit)
Look at Resident Evil 7, I'd still argue that's still the best VR horror game out there and that was developed hand in hand with the flat screen version.

Like you said we'll have to wait and see, but possibly two out of three of the biggest games at launch are hybrid games so its a good start.

 

[Kirkio]

I don't understand the issue with the price. The PSVR2 was announced quite a while ago, I'm sure most people that want it could have saved up in that time if they can't afford to drop the money on a whim.

I had a paper round when the original Xbox came out, saved my "wage" for half a year and bought it day one because I didn't want to wait until I got lucky one Christmas.

Luckily I can now just buy something like this on a whim, I think the majority complaining about the price are doing so on other people's behalf of aren't interested in the thing anyway.

Roll on the 22nd, first proper VR headset, can't wait!

 

[JohnSpartanLee]

edit: wrote some nonsense here earlier.

Gonna repeat my PSVR2 wishlist instead now:

RE7
RE1 VR
Code Veronica VR
EA WRC 23 (by Codemasters)
F1
WW2 dogfight simulator with full campaigns in Pacific and Europe for Axis & Allies
X-Wing Remake

And some flying animal simulator. Where you're a bird or a fly. Or a human-like creature with wings (flap to gain height).

 

[Kokoloko85]

Its probably not gonna set the world on fire but its gonna be great and good step forward.

VR is here to stay, its only gonna get better with tech. I think more and more its going to be used for education, simulation, training, health, travel etc etc.
Just like Video games were originally, its gonna get more and more popular. Its not a motion controller for the dummies that keep saying it lol.

PSVR2 will sell better than PSVR1, Apple will come into the market, Nintendo eventually one day, the others will improve more and more. Yeah, its not gonna just drop off the planet forever

 

[Long Far Gone]

Sony are going to have to start offering VR versions of their mainstream titles. People are not going to buy this hardware unless there's something beyond glorified tech demo titles; there needs to be more meat with those potatoes. For example, in Forbidden West they could perhaps have the VR player following Aloy around like a ghost and the whole thing is in 3D, while you use the DS controller. Of course, I'm not sure about feasibility but Astrobot VR did it stunningly well. Sony need to seriously leverage their 1st Party studios if they want to get PSVR2 off the ground.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

I’d love PC support but I highly doubt Sony will do it any time soon. I’m assuming PSVR2 is a loss leader just like their consoles. They don’t want you to buy their headset at a subsidized price, then go and buy all your games on Steam (where the vast majority of PSVR titles are also available, many at a cheaper price)

 

[blastprocessor]

Cockpit sims are the easiest to port to VR. Elite dangerous wasn't made with VR in mind and the that got implemented quickly. So many pc cockpit sims came out without VR and nearly all have the feature now days. Assetto Corsa wasn't made with VR in mind and yet it was added quickly once VR started to become popular for sims, and it doesn't appear to have caused it's VR mode any negative effects.

LMAO that's fantastic. Like some real life videos I've seen on youtube.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Does it work with pc?

Irrelevant.

But it will shortly, bet.

 

[ozz ex machina]

Well, yeah. It requires a 500-dollar console and a 500+ dollar VR set.

That's a lot of money for a gimmick experience.

Amen. When are people going to realise VR isn't the future for gaming?

 

[DenchDeckard]

Irrelevant.

But it will shortly, bet.

If they officially support this headset on PC ill be all over it!

If someone hacks it to work, do they normally work perfectly with steam and Meta store etc?

 

[DeepEnigma]

If they officially support this headset on PC ill be all over it!

If someone hacks it to work, do they normally work perfectly with steam and Meta store etc?

This one should have no issues if they get it to work due to the controllers and inside out tracking being pretty much standard now. Steam has a lot of profiles and adapts to various sets. They even got PSVR to work.

This single chord will be working in no time, and I expect official support a year or two in.

But Index has Alyx

This is true.

 

[ToTTenTranz]

He will be wrong. He's just butthurt Meta spent 100s of billion (the worth of some country's GDP) on him for VR and they're losing money at an unprecedented rate. That's complete failure right there.

Meta is making an investment in the technologies that will potentially drive the next technological revolution in the form of AR glasses and metaverse.
Their messaging is crap so far, with the ridiculous low-quality 3D avatars, but their AR technology is becoming the real thing.
For example, this is over 2 years old:



This is what they should be marketing along project Aria instead of those crappy miiverse avatars that everyone hates. What they need is a new marketing team, not a revised set of priorities in technological innovation.


Shitting on Zuckerberg is the new black for all the progressive tech publications that know nothing about technology or the markets, I get it.
However, neither is that investment a decision made by Mark Zuckerberg alone nor did Meta ever expect to recoup this massive R&D expenditure before people start buying AR glasses left and right, to replace their smartphones.

 

[DenchDeckard]

This one should have no issues if they get it to work due to the controllers and inside out tracking being pretty much standard now. Steam has a lot of profiles and adapts to various sets. They even got PSVR to work.

This single chord will be working in no time, and I expect official support a year or two in.


This is true.

Sounds glorious! fingers crossed

 

[FoxMcChief]

i feel like people are looking past the fact that PS has 0 access to porn or porn games. I see a bunch of people on my steam friends using the DeoVR video player and those are the people without the shame to appear offline lol.

Yup. VR porn is a huge reason for VR success. Sony closing that off without having a true web browser is downright dumb.

 

[deriks]

He wanted to do greatness for VR, he couldn't. Wasn't all his fault, still, didn't accomplish... PSVR is also far from being great and costs a lot. It's not a good recipe

 

[Gans]

High jacking this a bit to ask, to play RE Village VR I can just buy any physical ps5 copy of it, correct?

 

[th4tguy]

The price point isn’t doing it any favors.
I don’t think it will fail as dramatically as some believe but I do think it will fail to warrant future iterations. No psvr 3.

 

[Dream-Knife]

Outside of the Vive which requires a $2.5k-$3k computer to run. All the other VR options are shit with mediocre specs.

'VR capable' is like a gtx 970 from 2014 and above.

 

[Dream-Knife]

As soon as PC drivers are made for this thing, it will absolutely fly off the shelves.

Im not even heavily into VR but if I find out someone has made drivers for it.....im spending dem dollars.

I gave Sony money for a DualSense even when I didnt have a PS5.
If drivers come out im giving Sony money again for a PSVR2 even if I still dont have a PS5.

You'll need some sort of Usb c to DP adapter.

You're going to make a big mistake with that wire. As someone with a wire, don't do it.

 

[Ansphn]

Meta is making an investment in the technologies that will potentially drive the next technological revolution in the form of AR glasses and metaverse.
Their messaging is crap so far, with the ridiculous low-quality 3D avatars, but their AR technology is becoming the real thing.
For example, this is over 2 years old:



This is what they should be marketing along project Aria instead of those crappy miiverse avatars that everyone hates. What they need is a new marketing team, not a revised set of priorities in technological innovation.


Shitting on Zuckerberg is the new black for all the progressive tech publications that know nothing about technology or the markets, I get it.
However, neither is that investment a decision made by Mark Zuckerberg alone nor did Meta ever expect to recoup this massive R&D expenditure before people start buying AR glasses left and right, to replace their smartphones.

I respect Zuckerberg's all in mentality for VR and AR but I do not have faith in him making money on it even if he push the technology forward. He does not understand how to sell VR and I see the same failure for his AR headset.

Apple is entering the Frey with an VR/AR headset and I think it will be Apple as the company to find most success along with PlayStation. Apple because of their base, PlayStation because of their content for VR.

 

[mckmas8808]

No shit, and Sony should have learned with their first experiment. VR has its applications its useful for, but “mainstream gaming” will never be one of them. its niche at best.

I'm always confused by people that say things like this. What does mainstream gaming even mean in this context? If people can play GT7 in VR online against people that are playing it on a normal TV, why does it matter if it's niche or "mainstream"?

People need to start defining what "mainstream" VR means and what defines success for VR.