Support NeoGAF

[KOHIPEET]

Even though I'm interested in VR, I can't help but think that the whole experience will come at the expense of visual fidelity (especially on consoles), which is a bummer for me. To me, pretty games are more important than immersive ones. (Or developers should make tradeoffs where they are the least noticeable)

If Sony somehow magically manages to provide for example KZ:SF levels of graphics with a good VR experience...then...

 

[StuBurns]

I think one thing is missing in this thinking; indies. Sony has made a huge transition regarding indies and they are now a major focal point in their strategy/business plans. Look how most of them have played out so far. Start out on PC, get the game running well, build a fan base, etc. Then focus on learning PS4/porting over. If they can still lead with the PC, utilizing the headset, then they'll continue down that path of porting over to PS4. It's a win/win really.

Why? What difference does it make?

If Sony launch VR on PC, it's going to compete with Rift, which has Steam API advantages, so the indie dev would either have to support both, or just the Rift anyway. Why would they make a game on PC that could support VR and not support the Rift?

 

[Metallix87]

They fail on a regular basis, and sometimes they don't fail, sometimes they make some of the best games ever, no other developer will make VR exclusive content at that standard, because no one else can justify the expenditure on something which is a small proportion of an audience.

How do you know they will make VR exclusive content at that standard? They certainly didn't for Move.

 

[bj00rn_]

Making Driveclub a "flagship" VR title (several people have mentioned this) would be a huge mistake by Sony and a sidestep for VR in general. To really get VR on a flying start and make a good momentum from the get go would be to make proper tailor-made VR titles that focuses on a new type of experience instead of wrapping VR around worn out existing ones.

Anyway, unfortunately my own personal favorite VR-ready genre, serious flight simulators, will not be possible in 1080p.

 

[IvorB]

I go to DePaul university here in Chicago and we have a few dev kits.

No ones ever thrown up from trying it out.

Hmmm... I wonder if it is even a thing or people are exaggerating.

 

[TimFL]

Why? What difference does it make?

If Sony launch VR on PC, it's going to compete with Rift, which has Steam API advantages, so the indie dev would either have to support both, or just the Rift anyway. Why would they make a game on PC that could support VR and not support the Rift?

Last time I checked Valve said they'll look into supporting all/most of the VR devices (not just Oculus) coming out via their Steam API because they want devs to focus on the games and not on adding compatibility for multiple devices. Could very well include the Sony VR headset if they release it with PC compatibility.

 

[RoboPlato]

Making Driveclub a "flagship" VR title (several people have mentioned this) would be a huge mistake by Sony and a sidestep for VR in general. To really get VR on a flying start and make a good momentum from the get go would be to make proper tailor-made VR titles that focuses on a new type of experience instead of wrapping VR around worn out existing ones.

Anyway, unfortunately my own personal favorite VR-ready genre, serious flight simulators, will not be possible in 1080p.

I actually think that DC is a great candidate to bridge the gap between standard games and dedicated VR experiences. It already had a major focus on first person driving and a known genre that's based on a skill people already have, driving, is a great way to get less informed people to sit down and see what VR is all about instead of just walking around an untextured room.

 

[McHuj]

If they announce it will be compatible with the ps5 as well then the price will be easier to swallow for sure.

Something tells me that if VR takes off, hardware development and advancement will move fast and by the time the PS5 hits this one will be ancient.

 

[androvsky]

Hmmm... I wonder if it is even a thing or people are exaggerating.

My sister-in-law's youngest son just bought an Oculus Rift, and was telling me about how amazing it was. She said she kept playing Half-Life 2 on it despite it making her so motion sick that she'd have to lie down for an hour afterwards to recover. I don't remember her saying she vomited though.

She also told me that the sense of "being there" was so strong that in the HL2 intro she felt she could smell the garbage dumpsters as she walked past.

 

[StuBurns]

Last time I checked Valve said they'll look into supporting all/most of the VR devices (not just Oculus) coming out via their Steam API because they want devs to focus on the games and not on adding compatibility for multiple devices. Could very well include the Sony VR headset if they release it with PC compatibility.

It could, yeah, but again that doesn't help Sony.

I don't see a single thing that benefits Sony by releasing the VR headset for PC, I can see lots of negatives though. Just the fact the PS4 camera has a proprietary port is a strong indication that they have no intention of supporting PC.

 

[Nzyme32]

Even though I'm interested in VR, I can't help but think that the whole experience will come at the expense of visual fidelity (especially on consoles), which is a bummer for me. To me, pretty games are more important than immersive ones. (Or developers should make tradeoffs where they are the least noticeable)

If Sony somehow magically manages to provide for example KZ:SF levels of graphics with a good VR experience...then...

Although this is probably true, it really isn't a bad thing. There is a lot that can still be done and the experiences are likely still exceptional. Admittedly KZ:SF level fidelity is just not going to happen for VR on the PS4, but I think the experience and compelling nature of VR will negate that on both platforms.

 

[spideydouble]

I remember the Sony Glasstron way back in 1997 around the same time the first DVD players were available. That thing was expensive. In 2011 a Sony Store near me was demonstrating the Sony HMZ-T1 with Killzone 3. It was really nice.

Is this new Sony VR tech going to be similar to the Sony HMZ-T3W or something new and completely different?

I'm really excited for this, but don't have $1K+ to spend for it.

 

[S¡mon]

Making Driveclub a "flagship" VR title (several people have mentioned this) would be a huge mistake by Sony and a sidestep for VR in general. To really get VR on a flying start and make a good momentum from the get go would be to make proper tailor-made VR titles that focuses on a new type of experience instead of wrapping VR around worn out existing ones.

Anyway, unfortunately my own personal favorite VR-ready genre, serious flight simulators, will not be possible in 1080p.

They went back to the 'drawing board' with #DRIVECLUB. It's very well possible that, for a big part, they started over to give the game a really good and native VR experience.

 

[Sephiroth_VII]

Has anyone witnessed anyone genuinely throwing up from using the 'Rift?

My girlfriend felt really ill and had to take it off every twenty seconds when we tried it, and had to stop after around 30 mins. I felt it a bit at first too, but I was fine after 20 minutes or so, so YMMV.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Just put one of these in every best buy and Sony style store around the country with 5 of the best tech demos you have. No amount of marketing is going to replace the appeal hands-on (eyes-on?) impressions will garner. The first million are probably going to be sold entirely to tech enthusiasts, especially if the price tag is as high as rumoured ($250-$300 or more).

 

[Rogue_Ledr]

They need to find a way to do a power efficient VR without sacrificing too much on visual fideilty. Sure they can find a means of utilizing new techniques and technology to not make VR so demanding on the hardware.

Am I wrong?

 

[iceatcs]

Hmmm... I wonder if it is even a thing or people are exaggerating.

Motion sickness didn't mean only vomit - there are different symptoms from each person - dizzy, butterfly in the tummy, headaches etc...

 

[gofreak]

Making Driveclub a "flagship" VR title (several people have mentioned this) would be a huge mistake by Sony and a sidestep for VR in general. To really get VR on a flying start and make a good momentum from the get go would be to make proper tailor-made VR titles that focuses on a new type of experience instead of wrapping VR around worn out existing ones.

Anyway, unfortunately my own personal favorite VR-ready genre, serious flight simulators, will not be possible in 1080p.

Is the idea of putting yourself *in* a fantasy car and pelting around fantastic locales really 'worn out'?

We haven't even touched on that in a VR context yet.

I think VR needs new from-scratch concepts, obviously, but I think people would have pitchforks out if obvious wish fulfilment is ignored because a dev is too snobby about it and wants to reserve VR for totally unique concepts. Racing is one such fantasy that can't really be ignored, and probably can be done well without necessarily building a game only for VR?

 

[BloodMoney]

I actually think that DC is a great candidate to bridge the gap between standard games and dedicated VR experiences. It already had a major focus on first person driving and a known genre that's based on a skill people already have, driving, is a great way to get less informed people to sit down and see what VR is all about instead of just walking around an untextured room.

Agreed, I think DC is a great casual way to introduce VR. The second people boot up the game, put the headset on, and realize they are sitting inside of a virtual cockpit that they can look around ... it's really going to blow peoples minds.

That said, I do semi-agree with the post you quoted, in that there is a lot of potential for new gameplay types to emerge with the advent of VR... BUT experimental games that push design into undiscovered country, while exciting to think about, are not the type of games that are going to initially sell this kit.

Sitting inside of a 1000hp Koenigsegg and turning your head to look at your opponent before the flag drops... thats what sells VR day 1, IMO.
edit: along with exploring an beautifully rendered island, ie The Witness

 

[TheJerit]

Why? What difference does it make?

If Sony launch VR on PC, it's going to compete with Rift, which has Steam API advantages, so the indie dev would either have to support both, or just the Rift anyway. Why would they make a game on PC that could support VR and not support the Rift?

What?? You act like Occulus is the only one that can take advantage of those Steam API's.Valve recently released the API source code on github after all...

Developers, indie or not, deal with support all kinds of hardware all the time. If they tap into those Steam API's, for example, then does it really matter if its OR's, Sony's, Valve's, etc?? Of course there will be transition and what not porting it to PS4, but we all know that. They've established their foundation on the PC and successfully implemented it into their game. The hard part is done.

I like Occulus and hope they succeed in their own right. I just don't want it to be down to only one hardware available.

It's also a (even if somewhat subtle) incentive for PC only users that may be looking at picking up a console. One VR hardware for both, makes it a much more compelling reason to pick up the PS4 and even enjoy some of those same games.

 

[Nzyme32]

It could, yeah, but again that doesn't help Sony.

I don't see a single thing that benefits Sony by releasing the VR headset for PC, I can see lots of negatives though. Just the fact the PS4 camera has a proprietary port is a strong indication that they have no intention of supporting PC.

If steam's VR api is successful at integrating support of all these devices and peripherals, would it not be beneficial for the PS VR to be compliant with it as well as it could enable translation of pc games designed for compatibility with specific headsets/peripherals or the api to also support PS VR and translate to the PSx platforms

 

[J-P]

Haven't gone through the whole thread yet but it seems people are also missing out on the secondary advantage of this. Won't this also basically function as a HMZ-1 or whatever it was called? A giant 3D screen that can be used to view 3D movies, 2D movies, regular games etc.?

Wife is watching TV but i want to play something, guess i'll just strap on my VR headset and use it as a giant screen.

Correct me if i'm wrong.

 

[TheJerit]

It could, yeah, but again that doesn't help Sony.

I don't see a single thing that benefits Sony by releasing the VR headset for PC, I can see lots of negatives though. Just the fact the PS4 camera has a proprietary port is a strong indication that they have no intention of supporting PC.

Is there tin foil under that beanie? ;-p

 

[StuBurns]

It's also a (even if somewhat subtle) incentive for PC only users that may be looking at picking up a console. One VR hardware for both, makes it a much more compelling reason to pick up the PS4 and even enjoy some of those same games.

You think PS4 VR on PC is going to sell PS4s? What it will do is mean Sony has to build in profit to the unit, instead of selling at or near cost to expand the install base on PS4, and it's going to lose Sony their cut on every game someone buys on PC that they might have bought on PS4 otherwise.

It's like saying Nintendo should have released the WiiMote to PC. It's going to be positioned as a reason to own a PS4, it's a USP, they shouldn't want it on PC.

Is there tin foil under that beanie? ;-p

Really? Why do you believe they did it?

 

[TheJerit]

You think PS4 VR on PC is going to sell PS4s? What it will do is mean Sony has to build in profit to the unit, instead of selling at or near cost to expand the install base on PS4, and it's going to lose Sony their cut on every game someone buys on PC that they might have bought on PS4 otherwise.

It's like saying Nintendo should have released the WiiMote to PC. It's going to be positioned as a reason to own a PS4, it's a USP, they shouldn't want it on PC.

For the type of PC gamer that would be wanting to invest in VR, but will eventually get a console, you don't think that would be a big influence?


I've been an 80% PC gamer for about the last decade and I've switched mainly over to the PS4, so the split has reversed. I would love to be able to only have to deal with one headset and enjoy it on both platforms.

 

[viveks86]

Agreed, I think DC is a great casual way to introduce VR. The second people boot up the game, put the headset on, and realize they are sitting inside of a virtual cockpit that they can look around ... it's really going to blow peoples minds.

That said, I do semi-agree with the post you quoted, in that there is a lot of potential for new gameplay types to emerge with the advent of VR... BUT experimental games that push design into undiscovered country, while exciting to think about, are not the type of games that are going to initially sell this kit.

Sitting inside of a 1000hp Koenigsegg and turning your head to look at your opponent before the flag drops... thats what sells VR day 1, IMO.

Couldn't agree more. It makes no sense to push a completely new genre at the get go as a 'flagship title'. It's a huge risk and no one knows if it'll gain traction or not. Best approach is to ease people into mainstream genres that are a good fit for VR, get some adoption and then gradually introduce completely new ways to play. Experimental titles will happen on the side anyway. First person games such as shooters and racers are a perfect place to start. If you make a flight simulator to start with, for example, it would be way too niche and it will not get enough attention that the technology deserves.

Haven't gone through the whole thread yet but it seems people are also missing out on the secondary advantage of this. Won't this also basically function as a HMZ-1 or whatever it was called? A giant 3D screen that can be used to view 3D movies, 2D movies, regular games etc.?

Wife is watching TV but i want to play something, guess i'll just strap on my VR headset and use it as a giant screen.

Correct me if i'm wrong.

I'm not technical enough in this field to say it with certainty, but I can't see why you would be wrong

 

[KOHIPEET]

Although this is probably true, it really isn't a bad thing. There is a lot that can still be done and the experiences are likely still exceptional. Admittedly KZ:SF level fidelity is just not going to happen for VR on the PS4, but I think the experience and compelling nature of VR will negate that on both platforms.

I hope what you say will be the case. Anyway I think, more linear games like Doom (at least in the past) or horror games like Outlast, Daylight, not to mention Alien: Isolation might be able to look damn good beside supporting VR. (Everyone stop and imagine Alien with VR for a second.)

I also hope there won't be too many VR dedicated games and it becomes more like an option which will be up to developers to include or not. Like Options->Enable VR.

 

[Atomski]

It could, yeah, but again that doesn't help Sony.

I don't see a single thing that benefits Sony by releasing the VR headset for PC, I can see lots of negatives though. Just the fact the PS4 camera has a proprietary port is a strong indication that they have no intention of supporting PC.

I imagine that is more so people can not just throw PS4 support into their webcams and why they have proprietary memory for PSV.

They want to charge more for said devices..

 

[TheJerit]

Really? Why do you believe they did it?

Settle down, I was just joshin' ya. Well, for one, there a literal shit ton of HD quality, capable cams already on PCs. Even if we are talking about the 3d positional stuff, they could either release an adapter (smartest solution) or have PC kit, just like MS did with the original kinect. Of course the PS4 is their own ecosystem and they will only allow their camera. Its always been that way since the PS2 and that way for MS as well.

 

[StuBurns]

For the type of PC gamer that would be wanting to invest in VR, but will eventually get a console, you don't think that would be a big influence?

Maybe, but again, that doesn't benefit Sony unless the person is going to transition to mainly playing their VR games on PS4, and why would they if their PC is better?

It'd just be people buying the exclusive stuff, which hasn't been ported from PC anyway.

I've been an 80% PC gamer for about the last decade and I've switched mainly over to the PS4, so the split has reversed. I would love to be able to only have to deal with one headset and enjoy it on both platforms.

But that's true of anything, you'd probably like the DS4 to get full support, or to get every game on both, but that doesn't happen, because Sony don't want you spending money on PC that you could spend on PS4.

Settle down, I was just joshin' ya. Well, for one, there a literal shit ton of HD quality, capable cams already on PCs. Even if we are talking about the 3d positional stuff, they could either release an adapter (smartest solution) or have PC kit, just like MS did with the original kinect. Of course the PS4 is their own ecosystem and they will only allow their camera. Its always been that way since the PS2 and that way for MS as well.

I'm perfectly settled.

And no, that hasn't been the way since PS2, the PS2 and PS3 cameras were not that at all. Sony specifically decided to not do it this time.

We could debate this all day, personally, I think Sony would be insane to have PC support, and I think there's no way they will, but we'll see very soon, and I've no problem eating crow if I'm mistaken.

 

[PSYGN]

I want VR on Mirror's Edge 2.

 

[BloodMoney]

I want VR on Mirror's Edge 2.

Ditto. 3D skyscraper parkour = win.

 

[TrojanBlade]

Reading this thread I am getting the impression that many folks don't want SonyVR but have been furiously fapping to OCR for months...why the discrimination? OCR guys said they will only do it for PC, so Sony pushing VR on their console is good for the VR regardless.

My only concern is software support. I hope Sony gets a positive response so we have good support from both Sony and 3rd parties.

Looking forward to live in virtual worlds like never before.

 

[Rogue_Ledr]

I still have to wonder if DC really is going to use the VR headset.

At this point, they may as well implement it, even if it wasn't planned that way.

 

[TheJerit]

Maybe, but again, that doesn't benefit Sony unless the person is going to transition to mainly playing their VR games on PS4, and why would they if their PC is better?

It'd just be people buying the exclusive stuff, which hasn't been ported from PC anyway.

But that's true of anything, you'd probably like the DS4 to get full support, or to get every game on both, but that doesn't happen, because Sony don't want you spending money on PC that you could spend on PS4.

Probably for one of the main reasons I switched to PS4; dat comfy couch

I think you're right in that if it was just the same stuff on PC only, then what would be the point, but that's where exclusives come into play. Combine those two and its definitely much more incentive. If you can enjoy that same game and its experience on the PS4 and the exclusives, it would be a no-brainer to me.

True on the last part, but in the DS4 case, it's pretty much fully supported thanks to others and when I do hop on my PCs to play some games, it has already replaced my 360 controller completely.

I think where we would agree on is that Sony definitely isn't going to lead any charge on the PC front, that'll have to be left up to the 3rd parties. I'm just saying that at this point in time, I could see it making a good case to have PC support. I think the pro's outweigh the con's in that regard.

I'm perfectly settled.

And no, that hasn't been the way since PS2, the PS2 and PS3 cameras were not that at all. Sony specifically decided to not do it this time.

We could debate this all day, personally, I think Sony would be insane to have PC support, and I think there's no way they will, but we'll see very soon, and I've no problem eating crow if I'm mistaken.

Are you saying there were other cameras besides Sony's that were supported on the PS2/3? I think you may have misunderstood what I was saying.

I'm right there with you and have no prob scarfin' down some bird, but I'm just saying let's not dismiss it completely until we know for sure. I'm hopeful is all as I see it being a good thing for all, Sony included.

 

[bj00rn_]

Is the idea of putting yourself *in* a fantasy car and pelting around fantastic locales really 'worn out'?

We haven't even touched on that in a VR context yet.

I think VR needs new from-scratch concepts, obviously, but I think people would have pitchforks out if obvious wish fulfilment is ignored because a dev is too snobby about it and wants to reserve VR for totally unique concepts. Racing is one such fantasy that can't really be ignored, and probably can be done well without necessarily building a game only for VR?

I love racing and simulators. I just think Sony shouldn't promote VR as a racing "add-on", if you know what I mean. People should not be able to escape the fact that VR is much more than that. My favorite demo for my devkit is "Titans of Space" which is not a game at all, but more like an educational tool.

And as I mentioned; 1080p is also not to draw-distance friendly. 800p in DK1 was horrendous, 1080p is a step up, but not enough to escape pixel-soup in the distance. I even have my doubts on driving games, and I fear flight simulators are out of the question for several years yet, unless Oculus goes for a higher res in the CV.

Anyway, the only thing we need to do to ensure VR becoming a huge success is to promote it as the ultimate porn experience

 

[Soi-Fong]

I love racing and simulators. I just think Sony shouldn't promote VR as a racing "add-on", if you know what I mean. People should not be able to escape the fact that VR is much more than that. My favorite demo for my devkit is "Titans of Space" which is not a game at all, but an educational tool.

Actually, the only thing we need to do to ensure VR becoming a huge success is to promote it as the ultimate porn experience

Divorces will increase..

 

[Killroyskbg]

How about this game? It does not look like it should push the ps4 to the max but instead focuses on exploration of the universe as well as flight sim.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRpDn5qPp3s

 

[StuBurns]

Probably for one of the main reasons I switched to PS4; dat comfy couch

I think you're right in that if it was just the same stuff on PC only, then what would be the point, but that's where exclusives come into play. Combine those two and its definitely much more incentive. If you can enjoy that same game and its experience on the PS4 and the exclusives, it would be a no-brainer to me.

Right, but how many games is that?

VR support is going to be way more from third parties than Sony, that's always the way. When you're buying all your VR third party stuff on PC, Sony are only getting a cut on the few exclusives you buy.

True on the last part, but in the DS4 case, it's pretty much fully supported thanks to others and when I do hop on my PCs to play some games, it has already replaced my 360 controller completely.

True, and partially because Sony decided to use USB so it's nice and easy to do, because they make a profit on DS4s, so they don't care why people buy them.

I think where we would agree on is that Sony definitely isn't going to lead any charge on the PC front, that'll have to be left up to the 3rd parties. I'm just saying that at this point in time, I could see it making a good case to have PC support. I think the pro's outweigh the con's in that regard.

Don't get me wrong, someone will make it work, but Sony can block any attempts to officially support a hacked API and limit it's use, but purely in terms of having the unit operating, people will do it.

Really I don't think Sony will care after a while, if the Rift is Q4'15, Sony might have a year of being basically the only VR option in the market, that's enough to push PS4 and etch VR as a PlayStation thing into the public conscious.

And once that year's up, Rift will be better anyway, so people buying a PS4 one to use on PC isn't going to be a notable negative. But for that year, VR only being on PS4 is a huge advantage.

Are you saying there were other cameras besides Sony's that were supported on the PS2/3? I think you may have misunderstood what I was saying.

What I was saying was Sony didn't care if you bought an EyeToy or PS Eye and made them work on PC, but they do care if you buy a PS4 Camera and make it work on PC. That shift must have had a reason behind it, and given it being a key component in VR, that seems like a believable reason.

 

[J-P]

The Rift can fit over glasses, but the better (although more costly) alternative would be to have lens for the optics produced for your subscription.

Can't they make up for it in the software? I vaguely remember reading something early on when Rift was first coming out and they said something about people with astigmatism being able to input their lens measurements and the image would be output in a way that would come across clear as if they were wearing their glasses.

 

[Canis lupus]

This properly becomes once again a "We too"-reactions-product from Sony, like the Move, EyeToy, PlayStation 3's Motion-Controller, PlayStation Home, PSP, etc. They all look good on paper, but Sony never creates enough qualitative software to support those products.

Also it isn't hard to make a better product then the Oculus Rift, only trying to target the same low price-point is the challenge. Still i and surely Oculus VR are happy, that more people and companies show interest in virtual reality.

I think the casual aspect of the Eyetoy, Buzz controller and Singstar is what led Nintendo to make the Wii. In essence, the Wiimote and Kinect are all trying to do what the Eyetoy did.

 

[Bookoo]

Making Driveclub a "flagship" VR title (several people have mentioned this) would be a huge mistake by Sony and a sidestep for VR in general. To really get VR on a flying start and make a good momentum from the get go would be to make proper tailor-made VR titles that focuses on a new type of experience instead of wrapping VR around worn out existing ones.

Anyway, unfortunately my own personal favorite VR-ready genre, serious flight simulators, will not be possible in 1080p.

Seat simulator games like racing or flying are probably the easiest ones to port that will work out pretty well and would be a new experience for anyone who hasn't done it before.

 

[riflen]

I think one thing is missing in this thinking; indies. Sony has made a huge transition regarding indies and they are now a major focal point in their strategy/business plans. Look how most of them have played out so far. Start out on PC, get the game running well, build a fan base, etc. Then focus on learning PS4/porting over. If they can still lead with the PC, utilizing the headset, then they'll continue down that path of porting over to PS4. It's a win/win really.

I see what other posters were getting at now. This approach could work, it's a pretty large gamble though. I'm not sure Sony will go this route because of the large up-front cost with no guarantee of any return.

With indie games, Sony have zero liability. Someone makes an indie game on PC; a platform with very low barrier to entry for the developer. The game sells well enough that the developer buys a PS4 devkit and ports the game. Sony wins. I understand Sony have greatly simplified the bureaucracy surrounding the signing and support of developers, which is what's helping indie devs.

With HMD, Sony must develop and support a PC devkit for their peripheral before any games appear. The cost of this kit will also be crucial to the success of the strategy. If it's too high, the devs will not take a gamble (the install base for their peripheral will be tiny at first), if it's too low, Sony takes on even more risk.

 

[SPACECADET]

i'm so ready to cringe at the price they put it at.

 

[The Maverick]

If Sony's VR solution can hit $200 or less, game over. There's only been three moments as revolutionary as virtual reality in gaming for me, the release of the Wii, Xbox Live and Mario 64. At the right price, this can join that group. I'm pretty surprised to see how much negativity there is towards this, more people trying to innovate in the VR space is never a bad thing.

Sony is really the only company with the resources, mainstream appeal, and leverage to push VR gaming beyond a niche. I hope they succeed.

 

[vpance]

Singstar, Quiz games, family games etc.

Sony is in a position now where they could be the highest selling home console for this generation. They've captured and will continue to capture more and more core gamers now that the PS4 is the best system for multiplats and will have more 1st party exclusives.

Being the lowest price next gen system (with the greatest potential to price drop too, I might add) should mean they'll be more appealing to the casual gamer if the games are there.

Casual on consoles is dead IMO. Mobile has taken over that space and there's nothing left to capitalize on in the way that we used to know what casual was, as in waggle and Kinect, and family games.

Instead of wasting time pandering to the budget friendly they're better off capturing the attention of the masses with something as WOW as VR is.

 

[Goodacre0081]

There’s also no pressure on developers from platform holder Sony to adopt the tech; indeed, the studios we spoke to were excited by the technology, but questioned its viability as a platform. The cost of VR game development and its niche appeal means that many developers will wait and see how the Sony-authored experiences fare before committing to VR game development in earnest.

Sony needs to deliver on this point and make it work. IMO this is why Kinect is still an unfeasible venture, MS hasn't shown what the technology can really bring to the table. instead, they bet on third parties would pick up on the tech and run with it. unfortunately this still hasn't happened, almost 4 years after launch.

 

[StuBurns]

Can't they make up for it in the software? I vaguely remember reading something early on when Rift was first coming out and they said something about people with astigmatism being able to input their lens measurements and the image would be output in a way that would come across clear as if they were wearing their glasses.

My understanding is certain visual issues can be compensated in the barrel distortion, theoretically at least, but if you have hyperopia focal issues, you'd need the lenses changed.

 

[Orayn]

Haven't gone through the whole thread yet but it seems people are also missing out on the secondary advantage of this. Won't this also basically function as a HMZ-1 or whatever it was called? A giant 3D screen that can be used to view 3D movies, 2D movies, regular games etc.?

Wife is watching TV but i want to play something, guess i'll just strap on my VR headset and use it as a giant screen.

Correct me if i'm wrong.

Really depends on how it's designed. With a single screen that delivers one image to each eye via optics, you'd sacrifice a lot of resolution and vertical FoV if you wanted to use it as a generic head-mounted display for standard wide-screen content because that's really not what it's designed for.

Virtual cinema would work better for that type of setup, but that's also more complex to implement since it requires you to re-project the traditional content onto a screen in a 3D world.

 

[Natureboy99]

It'll be up to first party to show the world how VR is done. The first real mainstream push at VR is among us folks. Bring on the Drive Club .

Yeah I'd say there is a 99% chance delay was to make driveclub a vr game.