This explains how the PS4 will be able to run VR titles.
Source: http://www.polygon.com/2015/12/16/10287734/retail-playstation-vr-box
Now all I need is a price point.
>>320420023
Also, what's the best VR headset if you're a PC gamer?
How's the latency on that, I wonder
899.99 US DORRAR
>>320420490
I don't think any VR headset will succeed if they cost $900.
>>320420312
if you watched the video you would know.
>>320420312
I'm still a bit skeptical that the PS4 will be able to run VR titles in an acceptable fashion.
>>320420312
Allegedly under 18ms
>>320420130
It's a split between Oculus or Vive but Oculus seem the most bang-for-buck because they're producing their Rift 'at cost' to get a market going.
>>320420130
Oculus. Vive will be good too, but it won't be worth the extra cost and wait
>>320420023
It even explains in the article that it's just to show different views on the TV and headset. It's not going to magically give it the capability to have quality graphics at high framerates.
>>320420130
Vive. Help support HTC. If you don't, they might just go bankrupt.
>>320420023
300 to 400€
mmw
>>320420023
Well, they did say around the price of a console. So expect no more than 500 freedom bucks.
>>320420130
Probably Oculus Rift once the consumer version is out, which is some time next year
>>320422851
So Vive/HTC is the AMD of VR? Which is kind of ironic because they are the ones supported by Nvidia, while Oculus demos with AMD cards.
>>320423348
And pre-orders before this year is over.
Get hype.
>>320421248
>I dont think any VR headset will succeed
FTFY famicom.
VR is the new current fad.
>>320423480
Even AMD is doing better than HTC. HTC's main business is in smartphones and they expect their VR department to contribute less than 10% of their marketshare. They're pretty much dead unless they spin out or massively restructure, whether or not anyone buys the Vive. Plus, Valve supports Oculus too, so there's really not that much reason to support HTC in this way.
>>320421471
The PS4 cant even run normal games in an acceptable fashion.
Let alone a VR game.
>polygon
>DIRECT link to polygon
>>320424425
You're an idiot if you really think that.
>>320424602
Is there something I should know about Polygon? I don't really click on these links either way so I wouldn't know.
>>320424895
It's on the gamergay deepfreeze enemy site list
>>320424762
>Thinks VR is going to be a success in any way shape or form
>thinks he can get away with calling others idiots
Hows that 3D TV treating you?
>>320425082
Go to a convention and try one or something
It's the future for sure
>>320425156
>Its the future
>because I said so
Yeah yeah fagola.
People, and by people I mean gullible morons like you, said the same about 3D tv and every other fad in the past.
>>320424425
>constantly sold out and low supply
I'm pretty sure that means a success for Samsung, at the very least because they didn't expect so much demand and weren't prepared with the supply they had.
>>320422849
>It even explains in the article that it's just to show different views on the TV and headset.
That's not what it says at all. Not that the article says terribly much in the first place. It probably does something similar to asynchronous timewarp, would be my guess.
>>320424762
Have you tried VR?
It's just a gimmick. People will eventually go back to playing vidya on TV's.
>>320425702
>Instead, it plugs into a processing box, which in turn plugs into the PlayStation 4. This allows people to use the TV and PS4 to interact with, or just watch, the person playing their VR game.
>The black box looked a bit smaller than a Wii and is used to process the VR graphics and sort out the second-screen social experience on the television.
It's pretty explicit about what the purpose of the box is.
>>320420023
Can that be used to run non-VR games at 1080p 60fps with higher graphics settings? Like a ps4 expansion pack? that would be cool.
VR really isn't that great anyway. I've you've ever used a Vive or PSVR, you'd know it's not what they're hyping it up to be. I have. The comfort is lacking. The FOV is too small. The magnified pixels are annoying. The cable distracts you. No real haptic feedback. Walking into the bounds of your tracking space breaks immersion. The controllers have shit ergonomics and don't feel like you actually have your hands in VR. The rest of your body isn't tracked so you don't feel like you're a part of the world.
It's a cool concept and I could see a lot of people buying into it for what it is, but it is nowhere near the VR you really want.
>>320426027
How about you don't fucking scare people off right away and let the technology improve.
>>320425082
>Hows that 3D TV treating you?
And that right there, is why you're an idiot.
VR is nothing like a 3D screen because when you put on the headset there is no screen any more. You're inside the gamespace. Plus pre-recorded stereoscopic footage suffers from a fixed eye distance, which is why many people felt 3D movies felt 'off'. Not a problem when it can be changed for a game.
>>320425806
I used to own a dk2. The screen res obviously needs work but the talk about 'presence' is real.
>>320426201
Just managing expectations here. People can try it and see for themselves. All of the things I mentioned are valid problems that they're trying to solve. It's OK if you want VR right now. Get it. Just don't expect it to be the best thing ever.
>>320425917
>used to process the VR graphics
Exactly.
I mean, just use your fucking eyes. The cable runs from the box to the headset. It wouldn't very well need that if its only job was to generate an image for the TV from what the console renders for each eye.
>>320426316
Were you one of those guys who was pissed at HTC because you sold your DK2 expecting to get a Vive instead but now you can't get anything?
>>320426027
>but it is nowhere near the VR you really want.
But it is what I want. I don't care for the silly walk around VR, the pixels and FOV are bad to some people I guess, but for me even DK2 was fine. I just need it for flight and racing and hopefully mech sims and of course waifus. Some hand controllers for virtual /tg/. There's not really the need for the walking around shit.
Pornography will save VR.
>>320426520
>Some hand controllers for virtual /tg/
Have you tried any of that?
>>320426520
Well that's just you, and that's totally fine because you know what to expect. But a lot of people have expectations for what VR should be, and the vast majority of those would not be met by current VR tech.
You really have to try VR to understand where the hype machine is coming from BUT the experience is still a pretty oversold though, anyone who winds up foreverially huddled in a corner with goggles on is only kidding themselves. Some people will literally fall out of their chair, and others will be utterly nonplussed, or experience horrible motion sickness.
If you are taken in by the effect, even basic Unity games are pretty compelling - you tune out any aliasing and noticeable RGB pretty quickly and really feel like you're within an environment. You immediately appreciate the scale of large objects too, and any Avatar-like floating dust gimmicks feel more convincing than when in a 3D movie.
I'm really itching to get whichever unit has the best wand controllers though - when I've used Oculus headsets the desire to reach out and interact is fairly strong and its a bit frustrating and when you're stuck with a keyboard or controller, it feels like you're using a drumset to drive a car or something.
>>320426615
I got my free google cardboard in the mail and really want to try some porn after standing around in north korea.
>>320426691
I dunno, man. My guess is that there way more people with too-low expectations than people who are unreasonably hyped.
>>320426718
Have you played I Expect You To Die? What did you think of their control scheme?
>>320425156
Pfff because no one said that 3D and motion controls were the future too right?
At best VR will be a little something extra for people who have the money, but even they will still do most of their gaming on regular screens.
>>320426802
Well then that's a good thing. I'm all for VR, but over-selling it is not what should happen. People need to recognize the problems and understand what it really is.
How do I VR if I wear glasses?
![cex-shop-lincoln-web[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/6DMfZoL.jpg "cex-shop-lincoln-web[1].jpg")
>>320426505
Nah I just needed a new phone and the local was paying a lot them for used Rift sets. Thought I'd get rid of it while prices are good, before the consumer version shows up.
>>320426407
Just the words "Process graphics" doesn't mean it's full-blown graphics card like you are implying, graphics get processed in various different ways in various different places. It could be anywhere from just applying timewarp (which is not processor intensive at all), to just taking the PS4 video and splitting it into disparate streams for the headset and the TV. The first sentence explicitly tells you the purpose of the box is for splitting which actually does need a box, because the PS4 render for each eye is different from what you display on the screen there's a different FOV, chromatic aberration and warping, you can't just put one eye on the screen, or well you could but that's clearly not what they are doing since the screen looks normal and they play normally.
>>320420023
This has been known since a couple months after Morpheus/PSVR was announced. Is /v/ this behind?
I wonder how well it'll end up working on PC
Surely someone will write a driver for it, and having one headset for both PC and PS4 would be nice
>>320427095
I think all of the major headsets can be adjusted to have the lenses far enough away from your face for your glasses to fit in between.
>>320427095
You put the glasses over the set
>>320420023
AHAHAHA how the fuck are you going to do anything in your room with that thing. What a fucking bust. I was skeptical when I assumed the processing power would be in the headset itself.
>>320426932
I've used the DK1 quite a lot, but otherwise I've kept my distance until the new hardware comes out, so there's a lot of games and software, including that, I'm missing out on. I don't want to overdo it yet.
>>320427095
You wear them inside the headset. You lose FOV from this though so consider just not wearing them or using contacts.
>>320427157
How much did you get for it?
>>320427241
What do you expect? This is /v/.
>>320420130
I'd like to think that Vive will be better, since it comes with motion controllers and doesn't promote bullshit hardware exclusives
But the Rift looks a lot more "together" right now
>>320425082
If you think VR is like 3D TV you're an idiot. VR can ACTUALLY simulate real 3D TV.
>>320427449
That depends. For the Rift, at least, I know that the design of their headset and optics specifically is to allow a good distance between your eyes and the lenses while still having maximal FOV. Having tried all of the headsets, I'd say the Vive and PSVR are less designed for this.
>>320427450
https://uk.webuy.com/product.php?sku=SACCOCUVRRDK02
£216. Considering it cost $400 in total, I only lost about £50 out of it.
>>320427450
>What do you expect? This is /v/.
/v/ was up to the latest info until the Facebook buyout. All that killed discussion here but I thought at least people that cared kept up to date on it.
>>320427563
This. I tried watching a 3D youtube video in my Gear VR the other day and it absolutely blew me away. It was unlike any 3D experience I've seen outside of VR.
It's almost like you're actually looking into a portal. It's insanely good how physical the objects feel. It's as good as native VR itself, with the exception of it being constrained to a window.
>>320427797
What makes you think they don't? OP is one guy.
>>320421471
Isn't that what the second box is for?
>>320427928
I guess by "cared" I meant cared enough to post about it. Unless OP is just a straight up Sony shill.
>>320427848
Come to think of it, are there any "videos" that actually work like that? Letting you look into a scene through a window floating in space?
Like, with head movement parallax and everything. Sounds like it could be neat, and it might solve a bunch of the problems people have with directing 360° VR movies.
>>320421471
from the gameplay I've seen of it, the games look like some sort of in between ps2 and ps3 game, with not much happening on screen and small maps.
>>320427709
Seems a lot better in the US. People get back what they paid or up to around $100 profit on ebay.
There is no way the PS4 is going to render games at 120fps. I'm guessing the little black box is going to be doing some motion interpolation/reprojection to keep the head tracking responsive.
>>320428018
Why would someone make a thread about something they've known for months? OP didn't know, found the article, posted it. Other people did know, didn't post about about it for that reason. Seems pretty straightforward.
>>320422851
actually HTC is making up for some lost ground.
they posted some pretty solid results in November
>>320427797
I don't think it's a case of people being less informed, it's just that the facebook thing made VR threads more of a target.
Doesn't help that they're baby-tier easy to troll either. Just post any tired old claim about forced login or longterm eye damage and you're going to get a response.
>>320428172
Not with true parallax. There are stills though, and they're also pretty amazing. Search OTOY and light fields. The main problem is that you need a lot of space to record a light field. They're working on getting light field video working.
>>320428239
Part of it is that games don't actually run at 1080p, they're at some weird aspect ratio between 4:3 and 16:9
https://youtu.be/Ci5R6LNJQcE
>>320428459
I was thinking CGI. Like what Oculus studio are doing with the robot hand and the hedgehog thing.
>>320420130
The most sleept on
>>320428641
>>320428172
Nothing yet but there's technologies that show it's possible.
Pictures molded into a 3D space by Valve and 3D scaned video by various companies and Microsoft for Hololens show it's possible.
>>320428641
So, you mean like Henry, but constrained with a window? I don't think anyone's doing that. They would rather just do full VR, which is more worthwhile anyway.
>>320428545
Games are running between 544P-720P and being upscaled at the moment.
You are going to hear a lot of people who said "Resolution is the most important thing this generation" try to convince you that "Resolution doesn't matter" next year.
>VR choice for PC gamers is either facebook (OR) or google (Vive)
just kill me in my sleep
>>320428816
If it gets lighthouse support and higher refresh rate then it'll be gud
>>320428816
60hz and no low persistence. Doesn't matter what resolution or FoV you have if it's an instant headache. Current model is trash
>>320429030
What does Google have to do with the Vive?
>>320428816
Have fun with all your optical distortion.
>>320428998
Are you serious? That's how low res PSVR games are running? But you are absolutely spot on correct with how people are going to try and convince people that resolution doesn't matter; and it will be the same people who also claim that 60fps doesn't matter either.
>>320429030
>Google (Vive)
But Google have nothing to do with it.
>>320429030
>google (Vive)
VIve is from Valve you dumb frogposter
I'm gonna buy a 3D, curved, 4K TV AND and Oculus Rift
Make way for the future
>>320428993
Yeah, that's what I meant. It might have the advantage of letting you do more traditional camera techniques, while still making use of the positional tracking stuff.
now that i think about it,
how much would an oculus rift come to cost me? i know there's more models, etc. which are the best ones?
>>320429203
It uses a custom RGB screen so the screen door effect isn't as noticeable as others at least. Wonder what AC7 will be like in VR. Already runs at 60FPS normally
>>320429030
The Vive is by HTC and Valve. The Rift is by Oculus, a company owned by Facebook, which is different than actually Facebook working on the Rift.
Plus, Valve supports Oculus. We also know Oculus is going to try and sell their hardware at cost, or very close to cost, and instead make profit on software with their store. Fortunately you don't have to use their store, and can keep relying on Steam with Valve's software. There is no reason not to get a Rift over the Vive.
>>320429436
Nothing's been announced at this point.
>>320429436
It's confirmed no less than $350 for the official consumer model, but no more than $500.
>>320429620
What if you think Lighthouse is way cooler than Constellation because the lighthouses don't need to be connected to the computer, even though that won't have much of an effect on your personal setup?
Anyone with astigmatism tried VR?
>>320429203
A few people checked the ranges and pixel counted. Highest one is Rez Infinite at 1200x1080. Lowest one is EVE Valkyrie running at 640x960
Thing's basically fucked when Digital Foundry tests on it.
>>320429392
Doesn't make sense really. You could do the same with normal 3D. I had pretty much the same experience with the Terminator 3D ride ant Universal Studios with an even higher FoV since they used 3 screens.
https://youtu.be/gQYrESmPwjU?t=1219
>>320429620
>Valve supports Oculus
Not anymore
>you don't have to use their store
But there will be a lot of content exclusive to their store, not on Steam
>no reason not to get a Rift over the Vive
The main reason to get a Vive is Lighthouse being a better tracking solution, but really it's true there's not much else
I'm a a faggot who has never seen a VR device up close until these last few days, and even then my first venture into VR was just the Google Cardboard and an older generation smartphone. Even with limited technology behind it and crappy tech demo games, its extremely impressive. There was also a video of a live action VR video of a girl running around in a tight spandex bodysuit that made it abundantly clear that there were other uses for VR as well.
>>320428545
I think they're going to do it one of two ways. Rendering one image at 120fps and using reprojection to get left and right eye images, or a true stereo image at 60fps with motion interpolation. If the resolution is fairly low, it's doable.
>>320425806
i'd rather a virtual theater if possible desu just need to increase the resolution on the screens
>>320429935
>You could do the same with normal 3D
If you have a regular 3D movie, you don't get parallax from head movement. That's probably a pretty important cue for making something look like a window into somewhere.
>>320429965
>mfw my fucking phone doesn't have a gyro
>>320420023
why would they make a second box just for vr? why not sell it as an upgrade for every single game?
>>320428186
he got £216 in Cex VOUCHERS not actual cash
so he lost out on more cash and is trying to pretend buying it in the first place was not a massive waste of time and money
>>320430284
Probably because the hardware is designed to do a small set of very specific operations that are only really useful in VR.
>>320422851
>HTC: let's destroy everything that made our previous flagships good and copy apple poorly
good fucking riddance. I thought chinks would at least be able to copy well but I can't even expect that nowadays.
>>320429840
Well then you're just irrationally biased, and I don't endorse consumer purchasing decisions based on that. You'd be just as good as an Apple fanboy in my eyes.
>>320429956
>Not anymore
You probably misunderstood what I meant by "support." I'm talking about software, in which Valve's SteamVR supports the Rift. If we're talking about actual hardware and software cooperation in making product, then yeah.
>But there will be a lot of content exclusive to their store, not on Steam
So what? If you want it, then just use their store. If you don't want to support Oculus then don't use their store. They won't be making much money without you buying their software.
>The main reason to get a Vive is Lighthouse being a better tracking solution, but really it's true there's not much else
Even that is basically null now. The Rift can do both room-scale degree 360 tracking and front facing ~300 degree finer interaction tracking that can scale up to 15x15 feet just like the Vive, with perfect tracking quality, just like Lighthouse. The only case where you'd want Lighthouse is if you don't have a free USB 3.0 port available for the Constellation camera.
>>320430284
basically 2 gpus inside for each eye
>>320430140
I guess but with a movie you're sitting in a stationary position. The movement from a seated position doesn't amount to much. In the example I posted they used 3D that focuses close like VR would. But in a way you're right if you want to make a window but then once you're in the window it would end up like any VR world which would need parallax.
>>320429965
>>320425972
This is important
>>320430537
Where do you even get all this "confirmed" info?
Do your dads work at Valve and Oculus?
>>320430743
Needs more saturation and orange highlights.
>>320429956
>But there will be a lot of content exclusive to their store, not on Steam
A very good reason to not buy and support Oculus.
I swear people WANT another console.
>>320430872
They say this stuff right on Twitter and Reddit. Yeah, the guys working on this stuff go on those websites and actually post stuff about their work.
Will all this VR stuff work for people who are blind in one eye?
>>320429030
Cardboard is Google, Vive is Valve and HTC
>>320431059
Oh those..."confirmed" data, I bet they actually used the word "perfect" too.
>>320431070
You don't get stereoscopy, obviously, but you get the head tracking stuff, sure. And that's the important part, really.
>>320420023
>polygon
Nope
>>320431070
Yes, these work no differently than regular sight.
My dad is half-blind and used my Rift just fine, the real magic is in the head tracking.
>>320431203
Which pieces of data do you want confirmed, I can provide links.
For tracking, it's basically just knowledge about how the tracking technology works. All you need is sub-millimeter precision with low enough latency. Constellation and Lighthouse are actually very similar. They both use IMUs to derive position, and the use the other stuff, like cameras and lasers to correct for drift, since error accumulation happens when you integrate the acceleration data from the IMUs.
>>320429090
I thought StarVR was 90hz. Got a source?
>>320430354
>he got £216 in Cex VOUCHERS not actual cash
Which I used to buy my new phone from them.
>so he lost out on more cash and is trying to pretend buying it in the first place was not a massive waste of time and money
Who's implying that? I had a great time with it on many games and some projects. It's just that the 0.7 update created a divide in support, so I figured I'd cash in and wait for the consumer version.
>>320431497
What about the effect of the geometry of the hand controllers? That seems a bit harder to visualize.
The Vive controllers have these huge disks sticking way out at the top, and the Oculus ones kind of wrap around the hand. What kind of difference does that make?
>>320431627
Unless they updated it since you can check out the Tested hands-on
Both OR and Vive get released by April 2016. We'll know which is better by summer and wether we're getting actual software in 1-2 years.
Then they'll release new Rift and hopefully the advancement race begins till we're getting actual VR.
>>320431868
And by actual VR, you probably mean the matrix, right? Yeah, you're gonna be an old man before that happens.
>>320431868
>Both OR and Vive get released by April 2016
If I'd have to make a prediction it would be that maybe one of them will have an actual release date set by then.
>>320431762
http://www.shacknews.com/article/89958/e3-2015-eyes-on-with-starvr-and-overkills-the-walking-dead
Shows 90hz. What are you smoking, anon?
>>320429619
>a screen can make resolutions fake
Simply ebin.
>>320432083
They're wrong?
http://www.roadtovr.com/starvr-detailed-hands-on-big-field-of-view-even-bigger-potential/
>StarVR’s dual 5.5 inch, quad-HD (1440p) LCD panels run at 60Hz and (as the team will admit) are not ideal.
Also even if they're running 90hz they still don't have low persistence which is what is key to removing VR sickness.
What's the chances of the PSVR getting PC drivers and what are the minimum specs I'll need to build a PC for VR? I'm Laptop/Console/Handheld right now, but I would definitely build a PC for VR. PS4 might have interesting looking VR games, but it will never have porn, which is what really matters to me the most.
>>320425972
No, it's connected by HDMI it's not like another CPU or anything, all it most likely does is interlace the frames
>>320432212
Screen door effect isn't a matter of just resolution. It's about pixels and their distance/placement
The screens are 1080p, custom though to lessen screen door
>>320432020
I was thinking more like full body tracking and haptic feedback. It'll take a decade probably.
>>320432062
>Vive preorders begin in February, commercial version become available in April
>OR Q1 2016
Check it yourself if you don't believe. It's literally happening.
>>320432465
Oculus is claiming minimal req being GTX 970/R9 390 and i5-5670. Who knows if it's gonna be enough.
>>320432465
Depends on Sony really - if it has its own box theres very little chance people will get it working on PC.
Official drivers have 0% chance.
>>320432465
It's probably easier to get a Vive, if you don't have the money for both decide for one.
PS4 probably gets more actual working games and DOAX3 and shit.
PC is more for indie and buggy anime porn and any game that already exist to get VR driver
>>320432682
I'll believe it when its actually possible, the Vive was already promised for 2015 once and duh, that is already not happening.
They will never be loud about delaying.
>>320432754
PC already has actual VR games
Not to mention mods for basically all games
>>320431707
The geometry difference is for better tracking in different scenarios. Basically, Oculus went for a design where you're able to do certain interactions like grabbing a bottle by the head and opening it with the other, whereas Valve went with less interactions, but with more ease with using a limited camera/base station setup to provide 360 degree tracking. You can't do that bottle example with the Vive because of the physical shape and size of the controllers and their tracking dishes. Oculus uses a two camera setup as their default demo setup for Touch because it gives you occlusion resistance for those two handed interactions that you can't get with the Vive controller's design.
It gets a bit more complicated, but basically the gist is this:
If you want the most complete VR experience or to have the most options, get a Rift with Touch, and then buy 1 or two more cameras. Set up each camera for each corner of your room, leave them there, and you get the ability to have both 360 degree tracking, and fine hand interactions, something that is impossible with the Vive.
Sorry for the slow response, 4chan was giving me errors with posting.
Now if you excuse me I have do actually have some business to attend to. If you need sources about room-scale with Oculus, you can check these links, and yes, I know they're reddit, but there is some discussion that is valuable there:
https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3ws9c3/more_roomscale_vr_oculus_talk_from_oculus_story/
https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3wq6gk/palmer_luckey_confirms_that_cv1_works_in/
>>320433171
I wonder if any game will work with PSVR on PS4, just emulate the right stick or just to use the VR as a screen, but if run it on a 30fps game the interlacing would be crazy
>>320432682
>full body tracking and haptic feedback
That I can imagine. The haptics being the much harder part.
>>320433430
I can guarantee you they won't
Can't wait for DOAX3
>>320420023
>Now all I need is a price point.
they said it will be priced as a separate platform, so expect around 300 freedoms,
Why didn't they just make a better PS4?
>>320433953
It would probably cost like 800 bucks and noone would buy it, better price them both at around 350 and make money off of those that actually buy VR
>>320426201
>Why are you informing people of how shitty this fad really is?
>let them buy it and then suffer from buyers remorse just like I did, i cry every day over the money I wasted on a shitty dev kit.
>>320426316
Fagulus and similar gimmicks are literally screens taped to your face, with mediocre motiontracking, fagola.
>b-b-but muh presence.
You're literally just starign at a screen at point blank. There is no "presence". Its your eyes getting shot to pieces.
>>320434663
I think you're just concerned that this thread is going to die.
>>320434663
Here's your (you)
>>320434663
Is this how lazy the VR haters on /v/ are now? Sad.
>>320434663
>Screens taped to face meme
>'b-b-but' quote meme
>Eye damage meme
We should make a bingo card for this shit. It's so predictable.
>>320427449
And this is why VR will fail.
>buy this expensive gimmick
>aimed at an audience that most likely has to wear glasses
>doesnt work with glasses
>just get expensive lenses
>>320427449
>You lose FOV from this
so, just like in real life
if you glance up/down/to the sides, you're looking outside of your lenses already
as long as it's not pushing on your face horribly, it'll be fine
>>320435013
I never tried out one of the VR things, but how does the focus actually work?
Aren't they like right in your face? I have pretty much perfect vision, but at a certain point it's just too close too focus
I already have a 3d tv, laptop and desktop. I already know how 3d works and how cool it is.
From what I understand about all these vr headsets, all they do is track the motion/angle of your head and move the screen close to your face right? Tv/monitor 3D is like looking into a window/display case/diorama. The headsets will bring the screen directly infront of your eyeballs and covers your entire field of vision so it doesnt have the "small window of 3D" feel to it, right?
Im not buying in to the "presence" mumbjo jumbo and marketer hype, but if itll work how I think its gonna work I still think it will be great.
>>320435008
I can't tell if you're joking or not, because someone did make one.
Is VR just going to be a gimmick or will it actually be worth it?
>>320435287
There's lenses that focus to infinity
>>320434092
So they'd rather have it fail than release a.PS4 update. Who in their right mind is going to buy a PS4 VR to play the same damn games they can play on PS4?
>>320435369
Both at the same time or not since it all depends on software
>>320435293
It's pretty expensive for what they actually do, but it's still a lot different than just 3d.
Some games like horror games shit just jumps in your face and you want to run away but can't or balancing in first person like in Mirrors Edge for example fucks with your brain.
Can't wait for thousands of people to land in the hospital day one
>>320435287
They use bigass lenses to change the effective distance of the screen to something like 1.3 meters. If you happen to have a magnifying glass lying around, you can try the basic principle on your hand or something.
>>320435013
The fuck are you on about? Any wearable display has to have optics to handle the entire range of human vision. Hell, if anything it'd normally be people who DON'T wear glasses that'd need the help, precisely because actually trying to focus a fraction of an inch in front of your eye for long periods would be uncomfortable/impossible.
Shit how stupid is neo/v/ thinking that despite billions of dollars being tossed around, decades of research, military investigation and use of AR, etc., nobody ever though "gee I wonder if we should have some way to adjust the focal point"? Kill yourself.
>>320435513
No, there will be actual PSVR games.
Why'd they build an expensive PS4 that could run the VR right away without the extra box if people that don't want the VR wouldn't buy the PS4 at all?
>>320433430
It won't and it's one of the reasons its going to fail. Normalfags want Destiny, GTA and COD. PS4 has massive problems running COD at 60FPS at 1360x1080 never mind running two projections in one render buffer at 1080P. Hence why it's doomed. The quality of titles is not there at all.
>>320435287
The lenses move anon. That changes the focal point.
>>320435013
That anon was wrong. Even Google cardboard can have adjustable focus, you take your glasses off and adjust the lenses. It doesn't help much if you have severe astigmatism but that's a pretty small population.
These are my personal experience mind you.
>>320435726
Because if the PS4 had that extra but of power normal games would actually run decently.
Seems stupid to build a separate box powerful enough to run VR to sell alongside your not as powerful flagship.
>>320435975
That's just how consoles work.
if it would cost as much as a good gaming PC noone woudl buy them
>>320435293
>The headsets will bring the screen directly infront of your eyeballs and covers your entire field of vision so it doesnt have the "small window of 3D" feel to it, right?
Exactly. And because things are the right scale instead of in a window and your eyes don't report anything else, your subconscious is willing to accept you as in that place which is what they all presence.
>>320435791
The lenses in the Rift only move side to side, so you can adjust them for the distance between your eyes. If you wanted to be able to adjust the focal length, you'd need at least two lenses for each eye that can move relative to each other, and that would make the headset too big.
>>320435975
It's not a powerful box or another CPU that would let you run games at a higher fps or anything.
It's connected via HDMI, it's pretty much the box that interlaces the frames
>>320428816
>LCD panels
>not OLED
With no low-persistence that thing will never get off the ground. It also lacks the low latency firmware that Rift and Vive have with Windows 10 that's supposed to reduce latency between input and output from the headset so that you aren't constanly feeling a delay with your head movements.
>>320436118
No you wouldn't, Gear VR and some cardboard simply move the lenses back and forth to change the focal point, just like a camera lens. You don't need two lenses per eye to do that, just a threaded holder at the minimum. I'd show you my Powis VR if I were at home.
It surprises me that Oculus doesn't have that yet
>>320436383
I keep trying to tell people that, but people act like it's a graphics card or something.
>>320436435
More importantly it's locked to Starbreeze software. They mentioned that in the Tested interview.
>>320420023
>short ass cables
>>320436750
/v/ is dumb, they'll get it in a couple years
Where does a guy with a deaf ear stand on this? Will I be able to experience VR properly? ;_;
>>320437040
Well, you will hear things the same way you do now.
>>320437040
how is playing vidya like that? what do you do? do you only run sound in one channel in mono or something?
>>320437119
So I have to be facing the sound source or I hear shit-all? I'm hoping VR improves on sound in vidya.
>Try out the EVE Valkyrie demo at PSX
>First time testing VR, really hyped
>Kinda cool being able to look around with just my head
>Not super immersive because I have to use a controller and the graphics suck because lolconsole
Yeah I'll wait until this shit gets more advanced, right now it's a cool gimmick but not worth the price of entry.
>>320437487
I'm sure you could set it to output mono audio.
>>320437586
I dunno, man. Not sure if it would be that easy with the binaural stuff they're doing.
>>320436530
Not that guy, but I know what you are talking about. I know I saw a reason for why all of the the high-end headsets don't have that, but I don't remember what it was. Might be limiting the FOV or the IPD variability? I know all phone based headsets have lower FOVs and smaller IPD ranges.
>>320437368
I only recently lost my hearing. Right now I'm still figuring it out. I was hoping I could run sound in mono but games actually don't provide that option surprisingly (unless I'm looking in the wrong place?). I actually can't hear something unless I'm facing it in-game since I still choose to play with headphones.
>>320437487
What do you do IRL? I mean, that's what they're trying to get close to with all those head related transfer functions and whatnot.
>>320437487
No, they worked on audio so it sounds close to real life. You should hear things from your deaf side same way you do in real life.
>>320437863
You have to set it in your console's or PC's audio settings, it's not an ingame optionm
>>320437586
The thing about sound in VR is that you only use mono sources anyway, but compute different outputs for each ear depending on the position of the sound source relative to the player's head. The result is something like that barber shop youtube thing, only that it accounts for your head movements.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUDTlvagjJA
>>320437914
So far I've been trying my hardest to have the speaker(s) on my good side. Hearing in loud and crowded environments is pretty hopeless. Realised this in a job fair which led to the realisation of how bad it really is. Not enjoying vidya, music and movies the same way is the worst part though.
>>320437937
This should be an improvement then.
>>320437961
Thanks for this. I'll have a look.
>>320437863
how did it happen?
You could try using a program like Voicemeeter, I use it to make my audio mono when watching old ulillillia videos.
>>320438360
You're mistaking the difference between a stereo/mono audio file and stereo/mono output. Mono output just plays all sounds equally on all speakers.
>>320438479
No one knows. I woke up with no hearing in one ear and the world was spinning. Went back to sleep then woke up hurling out everything in my stomach every time I moved my head. Bed ridden for a few weeks.
>>320438528
Playing the sounds for both the right and the left ear on the same side of the headphones should result in some weird shit.
>>320438762
You should go to a doctor anon, before you die of some kind of infection.
>>320438479
Will look up that program, thanks.
>>320438762
damn brah
>>320438762
Huh. So your vestibular system got fucked, too?
Hey, maybe that'll end up making you immune to simulator sickness.
>>320438813
It isn't weird, it just doesn't sound as good. In a game you wouldn't be able to tell where something is coming from, but that is better for him than not being able to hear it at all.
>>320438827
Of course. This was months ago. It's the doctors that don't know, even after scans. Apparently this isn't all that uncommon so don't take your hearing for granted.
Sorry for posting so much about this. Kinda feels good to talk about it though.
>>320438964
But in a VR game, he can just turn his head. Plus, listening to this >>320438360 with only one earphone in, it sounds like a good deal get through from the other side, too.
>>320439050
Let's say someone walks up to you on your deaf side and says hi. Do you hear it?
>>320439292
He can turn his head, but if something is coming up on his deaf side he won't know its there until it's too late. At least with mono he knows something is coming even not knowing from where.
>>320439050
Godspeed, anon.
>>320438964
It doesn't sound as good and there are games that already do this for some reason. It's better than not hearing anything though, like you said.
>>320439292
The problem is unexpected sound. I wouldn't hear someone/something coming up on me from the wrong side for example.
>>320439479
There you have it.^
>>320431010
Oculus is paying for the development of a over 20 VR games from scratch. They're not obliged to support their competition.
Don't expect it to be any less than 250.
VR is in a weird place right now. It's completely poised to enter the market in 2016, but people aren't sure if they want it or not yet. At this point, enthusiasts and VR evangelists like me are basically already sold on the tech, but it's going to be hard to convince normal people that they need a 300$ headset for this shit.
We've got a lot of cool shit running in VR right now, but the problem is that it's still pretty early. Not too early, like it was in the 90s, but still early. We've just barely got the tech to run about 1080P per eye at 90FPS, and that's only on PCs. Right now, I'm excited for the Oculus to launch, but it's def not for everyone.
>>320437531
>playing the inferior version of the game on an inferior device
>using a controller instead of a HOTAS
I get it, though. I'd say you should give the Rift a shot with a HOTAS in Elite:Dangerous or something one of these days, because it's got a wider FOV, higher res, and better tracking, but if you aren't sold, I don't blame you. It really is a gimmick for the most part until all these VR startups start actually getting their products to market. Right now we've got like three different companies trying to create a metaverse (AltspaceVR, JanusVR, and the Second Life guys), who knows how many developers still messing around with devkits, and countless other people trying to push the tech past the gaming world. We've got people working on virtual desktops, touring 3D renders of real houses in VR, 360 video content streaming platforms, and loads of other stuff.
It's all really fucking cool- but since none of these devices except Gear VR and Cardboard (the least impressive ones) have even gotten onto shelves, let alone any software for them, nobody cares yet.
I feel like a doomsday predictor here, screaming "YOU'LL SEE, YOU'LL ALL SEE", but I'm telling you guys, this is the next big thing. It just won't reach any real saturation for another couple years.
>>320422851
I am surprised HTC didn't work on something similar to gear VR instead.
Oculus seem much more organized. HTC shot themselves in the foot by announcing Q1 launch and changing their minds at the last second.
If they announce interesting features for Vive that are worth the wait then I will consider it. Simply making the controllers smaller at this point to be on par with oculus is just not something worth waiting several months for.
I hope they announce 3D haptics like tactical haptics for their motion controllers, that would entice me to get vive instead granted they make their controllers smaller and comfier.
Or if they add better gesture recognition that allows you not only to point, but to flip the bird as well.
I just want my VR porn.
>>320438952
Had a quick read on this. Many of the symptoms are exactly what I had when I first lost my hearing. Crazy how the body adapts, though. My balance has improved immensely.
>>320439929
VR's biggest problem is that you can't understand what it's trying to achieve unless you have access to one, and by then you've already had to spend the money, which not everyone is willing to do. Google is doing things right with the cardboard, but they aren't nearly advertising it enough. Spend under $20 to get a taste of what VR will be.
>>320440179
That's a nice floor
>>320441213
I've seen better.
>>320425972
The first few games released that could utilize the extra power of the box would do this, then devs would get lazy and it would be 900p 30fps WITH the box and 720p 24fps without the box.
>>320441056
That's exactly it. Oculus is doing their best to ship out demo kits to stores when the Rift launches in the next four months, but that's still a ways off, and we can't possibly hope for everyone to try it.
Cardboard is in a good place for introducing it to the masses, but it doesn't really have any killer apps yet (I mean, how could it?). It still feels like a gimmick, but it's a good gimmick.
>>320425972
that's not how it works at all
it's probably just for getting the dual display right
What do you think of Fove?
Eye tracking sounds nice, but I assume their headset would be incredicbly expensive with little support for its eye tracking because it would be a niche of a niche.
God damn I wish 3D haptics like tactical haptics and eye tracking were standard with the current generation of HMDs.
>>320441690
Google recently gave away a bunch of Google Cardboards to promote Star wars which might give VR the kick it needs. I got one of them in the mail and even without any killer apps or anything like that, I can honestly say it has blown me away. Just watching 360 VR videos is amazing.
>>320441694
What would you use eye tracking for?
I really can't see this doing well
Like at all
Anyone else getting these vibes for vr?
I'm excited for VR but its still a bit ahead of its time.
Considering it needs to run at 90Hz to avoid motion sickness and a decent resolution (1080p per eye?) To avoid screen door effect, the graphics hardware we have isn't QUITE there yet. It is, but it's still new, top of the line. And expensive.
I think VR will explode 2-3 years from now when its easier to meet hardware requirements.
I know I'm sold on VR, but I don't have the money. My computer has a 290x and a 3570k, and when I read that my build which is fairly high-tier will probably struggle to give the proper VR experience, that's when I knew it was ahead of its time. Most people don't even run games at 1080p 60fps yet
>>320442045
In RPGs for instance or any game for that matter, if you look at certain NPCs they can react to you.
In metaverse type games like janusVR for instance it would make a large difference in making that avatar feel believable if you can see what they are looking at.
You can also cause certain objects in the environment to react to you if you are within proximity and focus on them for a while.
>>320442049
Have you tried it? It's one of those things that seems retarded until you experience it.
>External processing box
>Game companies can now add external hardware to keep up with Pee Cee
What's the point of getting a console anymore when theyre just cheaper, shittier PCs now
>>320442532
Why would anyone think VR is retarded? It adds fucking depth perception to video games. If you don't think that's amazing then you don't like video games
>>320441694
Knowing Carmack, the next generation of Rift might have basic eye tracking, but FOVE right now seems to unfortunately be among the bajillion gimmick headsets that will likely end up DOA, and eventually eaten up by a bigger company along with their tech.
>>320442045
Aiming with eyesight or foveated rendering.
Foveated rendering is essentially rendering a very small amount of detail at a time, or only rending in detail exactly where the eye is looking at any given time. It's only possible in theory because the human eye actually sees a very small amount of detail. Interesting stuff.
>>320442049
I'm skeptical about PSVR taking off, but the install base for Oculus and maybe Vive is there.
There's also billions of dollars being poured into VR companies, so it's hard to say that nothing good will come of it.
It's also one of those things that you literally can't judge until you've experienced it, because it's impossible to replicate without a Rift on your head.
Cardboard is sort of there, but it's technologically miles behind.
Like
>>320442409
says, it's still sort of ahead of its time in a purely mass market sense, but the technology is there, and a niche exists. It's also sort of cost-prohibitive to non-enthusiasts. What's in question is how soon that niche is going to expand - and I'd say it'll take a year or two, but it'll happen.
pic unrel
>>320442686
I want to play Ace Combat 7
>>320441694
Thing is eye-tracking isn't really all that much more useful than center of head-tracking, until you get to really fast speeds and high screen resolution. Tactical haptics is cool tech, but that it is their fault it isn't standard they are holding a patent and tried to go it alone.
>>320442686
it's not adding processing power by any means, probably just interpolating frames or something like that.
although a modular console would be an interesting experiment.
>>320442691
It is really hard to put onto paper and explain to people why it is cool without the ability to just show them. Just saying it adds depth perception isn't enough to get the average consumer to spend a vast sum of money on it.
>>320442409
wasn't minimum spec for oculus CV1 a 290/970, you should be able to run it just fine. your cpu should be on par if not better than an i5-4590.
Of course if you cannot afford it and have the gift of patience then waiting for a better deal would be the wiser choice.
>>320442919
Just tell people it's like when you have a dream set in some video game or other world. If they have never had a vidya dream then they can get out
>>320442427
You don't need eye tracking for that. Plenty of demos already have those. You can just take the center of their vision because when you are wearing a headset you move your eyes less and your head more. It's not perfect, but it's good enough for those purposes.
>>320442691
We've had VR for a while now.
Unfortunately they're all shit. It just sounds like a gimmick to the average person.
I think it's the future of media.
>>320442746
>I'm skeptical about PSVR taking off, but the install base for Oculus and maybe Vive is there.
I don't get the reasoning behind this. There's a ridiculous number of PS4s out there.
>>320420023
>post you're yfw when this absolutely DOMINATES the VR market
>>320435791
Why would the focal point ever need to change? The screen is a fixed distance away and your eye can change its focus by itself.
>>320442045
>>320443371
For people with shit vision.
>>320443298
PSVR will fail because of the PS4s hardware
>>320420023
We've known this for a while anon. We just didn't know what it looked like until now.
I'm really stuck between this and the rift. On one hand, the rift will be PC so there'll be a hell of a lot more opportunities, but I'm probably gonna have to upgrade my CPU and mobo to get a decent framerate.
With the PSVR I'd get the exclusives and a smooth experiences all around but it'd be much more locked down.
>>320443149
sweet spot in the middle, so it is a bit like a tripple monitor set up then. If there is too much distortion on the sides I can see how moving your eyes around the display would get unpleasant.
Hopefully after a few more years we will have much better optics so you can look around approximately your entire field of vision without the image getting worse as you look away from the center.
>>320443303
>The headsets come out.
>Playstation's is the most known by Sony's sheer marketing strength.
>It fucks up and drags the rest of VR down with it.
>>320424895
part of the cancer along with kotaku
>>320443298
It's a combination of price and killer apps.
The thing's gonna be easily upwards of 250 dollars, more likely around 300, and god knows what games are actually gonna turn out good. Plus, if people want to use their hands and shit, they gotta buy two PS Move sticks.
Hardware might be a problem, but honestly so long as devs keep their shit running at 60-90 FPS, it shouldn't be a sticking point.
It's also kind of silly because objectively better headsets are releasing on objectively better hardware.
>>320443694
I'm also hoping this doesn't happen. Cardboard hasn't done this, thank god, so I'm hoping PSVR won't either, but Oculus is gonna hit the market first anyway, and it's going to make a HUGE splash at least media-wise when it does, so I think we're good. They've also got Zuckerbucks behind them, so I'm not really worried.
>>320439929
>I feel like a doomsday predictor here, screaming "YOU'LL SEE, YOU'LL ALL SEE", but I'm telling you guys, this is the next big thing. It just won't reach any real saturation for another couple years.
Well duh on pc it will be a long progress of games being added and people getting better hardware. Doesn't matter if it takes off or not it will slowly develop. On PS4 sony has to make select downgraded titles specifically for PSVR because it can't run it's main titles on it. When the ps4 is done so are it's vr titles/support until the ps5.
>>320443694
There's a reason why Morpheus was being worked on shortly after Oculus came out. The Japs were interested in Oculs, and that would potentially mean Jap devs would slip away from them. The Morpheus is literally Sony putting a fence up to keep their chickens in, they really don't care about VR.
>>320443298
Even if they manage to make it a pleasant experience, how many of those people are willing to fork out at least $300 for PSVR? It will cost around as much as buying another console.
Sony should have released the PS5 with VR in mind instead of jumping the gun to get a piece of the pie.
>>320443629
The consumer optics have really good sweet spots now. The moving your head more has more to do with the FOV.
>>320443589
I don't think so really. It's one platform so optimization is easier. Devs don't even have to worry about an Xbox VR headset additionally. Sheer graphical fidelity isn't as important in VR, it's more stable FPS and resolution (The custom screen they're using makes screen door effect a lot less than what is seen at 1080p on other sets)
Of course PC sets will be better, but I think PSVR will end up solid. The one game I really want to use it on is Ace Combat 7
>>320443991
You say that like the average person who owns a PS4 also has a PC capable of VR
