Support NeoGAF

[TTP]

I still really have no idea what the breakout box is.

Only question i have is would that breakout box perhaps hinder attempts by people to make custom drivers to someday get the psvr working on PC? Like does that box make it somehow more proprietary and thus harder to get working on pc?

My dream scenario is to get the psvr for ps4 but then to someday also have it working on pc so I can spare the 600 to 800 for an oculus or vive.

They could have done that with the Move, but they didn't. They released the Move.Me software instead, which allowed to play around with the Move on PC connected to the PS3 via Ethernet.

In best case scenario, Sony could release a "PSVR.Me" thing operating under the same constrains.

 

[TTP]

the biggest issue with the move controller is the legacy mini usb cable that is a relic.

You mean it's not micro-USB so people with just PS4 (no PS3) would need to go out and find a mini-USB cable?

That's a good point actually.

 

[Miniature Kaiju]

I don't know why they're stating it has no downsides.

Because it's virtually free and better than not having it, everything else being equal.

 

[Portugeezer]

I'm not opposed to people being excited over PSVR. I'm sure it's going to offer up a great VR experience to console only gamers, or people who can't afford the first wave of PC VR (which is many of us - myself included).

But common, don't be falling for the same exact stuff from 2013 now. Think critically, and still be excited!

People saw the Uncharted trailer.

 

[RoboPlato]

I don't believe that at all.

It's rendering at a lower res and framerate as Oculus/Vive. That probably makes up for most of the difference. Combined with some smart hardware design, it sounds like the overall experience winds up being similar.

 

[Portugeezer]

This is curious. Reprojection can be useful, especially for consoles, but it's not without its faults. I don't know why they're stating it has no downsides.

In the video he didn't say there is no downsides, he described some of them but says that for many games experiences it's imperceptible. What we do know however, is that having 60fps flat is not the best for VR so reprojection to 120Hz is better for player movement.

 

[Shenmue]

They could have done that with the Move, but they didn't. They released the Move.Me software instead, which allowed to play around with the Move on PC connected to the PS3 via Ethernet.

In best case scenario, Sony could release a "PSVR.Me" thing operating under the same constrains.

I don't feel like they'll release a Me type software for the PSVR. I'm just wondering about user made drivers to get it working on PC.

 

[TAJ]

This talk about porn being impossible on PSVR is funny. All they need is VR support in the media player app.

In addition to support for 3D panoramic video in the media app they'll have a VR cinema (simulated theater) mode for regular video files and Blu-ray. Mark it.

Lol

Well that just about confirms it that he would want 1/2 the resolution with a rgb vs pintile

I wonder why HTC and Oculus didnt go this route if its a better display and takes less resources?

Carmack pretty much said why. Bigger numbers sound better.

 

[cheezcake]

I don't believe that at all.

Better to do the math.

Vive/CV1 Render Target = 2160x1200x90 = 233280000 pixels/sec
PSVR Render Target = 1920*1080*60 = 124416000 pixels/sec

So the PSVR render target is 53% of the PCVR render targets, basically half. And a 7850 (roughly PS4 equivalent) is slightly less than half as powerful as a 970. So magic sauce only accounts for a tiny fraction of the supposed gap.

Effectively it's not all that surprising when you consider how much lower the resolution and framerates they're targeting are.

 

[iceatcs]

This talk about porn being impossible on PSVR is funny. All they need is VR support in the media player app.

Yeah most VR porn will be something like a 360 video clip. Hopefully there will be a 360 video app supported on PSVR.
Full 3D video porn can be done by 3D scanner, that allow to walk around. But budget sake, and that will have to get Sony approve to release, which also unlikely too. It won't be many of them in first few years.

 

[the-pi-guy]

This talk about porn being impossible on PSVR is funny. All they need is VR support in the media player app.

Possibly even just the web browser.

Who knows what can be done in the web browser. With the Wii, some websites were made that let you use the Wii remote as a control. Could be cool to have websites to utilize the headset.

 

[The Rizza]

There has been a few posts elsewhere asking similar thing, and the answer is pretty much "No".

Quoting Reddit post;



In fact, the whole thread has many points iterating the fact that users with 1 eye can see 3D with VR.

Other posts;
http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/2pviba/oculus_rift_for_someone_blind_in_one_eye/
http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/18cnpq/how_well_will_this_work_for_someone_who_is_blind/
https://redditjs.com/r/oculus/comments/2qplki/would_the_oculus_rift_works_on_me/

Wow, awesome! Thanks for this info

 

[Chris Metal]

the biggest issue with the move controller is the legacy mini usb cable that is a relic.

Not really, I own one of these... Move charging dock.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Yeah, I'm way more excited for VR's non-gaming applications. I know that PSVR will primarily be a gaming device (especially at the beginning), but I hope this kind of thing will get just as much attention. Bring on virtual tourism

Same here. It is the virtual museums and places to explore that has me more hyped.

 

[bitbydeath]

Same here. It is the virtual museums and places to explore that has me more hyped.

Yeah, I look forward to being able to virtually walk around in a hotel before reserving my accommodation.

 

[gcubed]

Not really, I own one of these... Move charging dock.

Yea, that's probably best case for psvr, are they available cheap anywhere? Just have to try gamestops

 

[jabberwocker]

This talk about porn being impossible on PSVR is funny. All they need is VR support in the media player app.

In addition to support for 3D panoramic video in the media app they'll have a VR cinema (simulated theater) mode for regular video files and Blu-ray. Mark it.



Carmack pretty much said why. Bigger numbers sound better.

If Sony made a pc version that cost more money lets just say PSVR is 400 us and the pc version is 450 -500 would you buy it? It has a better screen as it sounds, better audio, and uses less resources?

 

[Mobius1]

Really hoping sony supports 3D Blurays on PSVR. Head-tracking inside a virtual cinema would be nice but I'd be happy with a fixed image on a simulated large screen like their HMZ devices.

 

[darkwing]

this can't be less than 399 based on the info

 

[Chris Metal]

Yea, that's probably best case for psvr, are they available cheap anywhere? Just have to try gamestops

$19.75 at Amazon at the moment, haven't checked elsewhere.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B003O6G114/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1456364871&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40&keywords=move+charging+station&dpPl=1&dpID=31d9kvVy%2BBL&ref=plSrch

 

[lukeskymac]

Why they now suddenly starts pr speak about 60 reprojected to 120 again is an example only to try to spin a comparison to native 90 970 performance.

The 970 comparison doesn't come from Sony, not even from the presentation.

Really hoping sony supports 3D Blurays on PSVR. Head-tracking inside a virtual cinema would be nice but I'd be happy with a fixed image on a simulated large screen like their HMZ devices.

The movie would look reeeeally low res though.

 

[mothball]

The 970 comparison doesn't come from Sony, not even from the presentation.

Yeah but let's not let facts get in the way of spin

 

[spannicus]

So guy says PSVR will be just as good as PCVR?

 

[Elitist1945]

Don't those Move charging stations have an attachment so you can charge PS4 controllers? I remember seeing that.

 

[Lister]

Better to do the math.

Vive/CV1 Render Target = 2160x1200x90 = 233280000 pixels/sec
PSVR Render Target = 1920*1080*60 = 124416000 pixels/sec

So the PSVR render target is 53% of the PCVR render targets, basically half. And a 7850 (roughly PS4 equivalent) is slightly less than half as powerful as a 970. So magic sauce only accounts for a tiny fraction of the supposed gap.

Effectively it's not all that surprising when you consider how much lower the resolution and framerates they're targeting are.

I'm not sure that necessarily follows. Resolution and frame rate probably don't have a linear relationship to GPU performance, like you are suggesting.

And this certianly does not in any way shape or form mean hat the ps4 is and I quote:

"60% more effficient".

It DOES mean that the PSVR is 60% less demanding due to lower specs though.

 

[TAJ]

If Sony made a pc version that cost more money lets just say PSVR is 400 us and the pc version is 450 -500 would you buy it? It has a better screen as it sounds, better audio, and uses less resources?

That would kind of a dick move, so maybe not out of spite. I would want something like that, though.

 

[lukeskymac]

So guy says PSVR will be just as good as PCVR?

No. Just that it'll be closer than some people have been giving credit for. There's one lunatic on these forums that seriously said that PSVR is closer to GearVR than Rift/Vive. The salt is real.

 

[ZehDon]

So guy says PSVR will be just as good as PCVR?

In terms of PSVR's ability to induce presence, yes. There will be a fidelity difference, though. Sony have done a remarkable job in minimising the differences, but a top end VR PC can simply push more pixels.

 

[Movalpolos]

So guy says PSVR will be just as good as PCVR?

As someone who has tried morpheus and dk2, the difference was negligible.
I have not tried cv yet, mine comes in May.

 

[spannicus]

No. Just that it'll be closer than some people have been giving credit for. There's one lunatic on these forums that seriously said that PSVR is closer to GearVR than Rift/Vive. The salt is real.

In terms of PSVR's ability to induce presence, yes. There will be a fidelity difference, though. Sony have done a remarkable job in minimising the differences, but a top end VR PC can simply push more pixels.

Thanks. Gonna pick this up over the Vive. Hope Sony puts their all behind it though, still pissed about the vita.

 

[TalonJH]

I see alot of parents having a problem with PSVR and porn lol. I dont think its gonna happen unless the thing gets hacked.

I see alot of wives having a problem with PSVR and porn.

 

[Muzicfreq]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaM2Xt0JrSU&feature=youtu.be

this still blows my mind.

Gonna need a mop with me for this one lol

 

[cheezcake]

I'm not sure that necessarily follows. Resolution and frame rate probably don't have a linear relationship to GPU performance, like you are suggesting.

And this certianly does not in any way shape or form mean hat the ps4 is and I quote:

"60% more effficient".

It DOES mean that the PSVR is 60% less demanding due to lower specs though.

Na it's not purely linear but it's close as long as you're not encountering significant bottlenecks (cpu, memory etc.), ballpark figures like this tend to be decent estimations and it agrees with what the Epic devs have said.

 

[spannicus]

I see alot of wives having a problem with PSVR and porn.

No because they will wait until the husband goes to bed and enjoy some vr porn for themselves lol
Remember when the PS4 launched people were streaming themselves having sex lmao.

 

[TTP]

the biggest issue with the move controller is the legacy mini usb cable that is a relic.

Don't those Move charging stations have an attachment so you can charge PS4 controllers? I remember seeing that.

No, not the official one. You maybe saw some third party charger?

 

[Shaneus]

With the revelation (maybe?) that the breakout box only does 3D audio, I wonder what the chances would be of being able to use one on PC, even for basic stuff. We saw the Kinect get PC drivers and tinkerers going nuts for it, don't see why it wouldn't be the case for PSVR as well.

Oh man, it's good to see that Seanspeed is still fighting the good fight somewhere.

Holy shit he's not half keen, is he?

 

[KingSnake]

Same story from a VR developer on Reddit:

"PSVR is extremely close to being on par with Vive and the Rift w/ a gtx970 based on the tests I've done. The team from Epic (Nick & Tom) have also stated the same in at least one of their VR Twitch streams. If your app runs at 90Hz on a PC with a gtx970 then you should be very close to 60 on the ps4. And with the 120Hz reprojection applied it's glassy smooth."

A 970 at 1080p60fps is very close to a Titan X running 4k120fps.

 

[TalonJH]

No because they will wait until the husband goes to bed and enjoy some vr porn for themselves lol
Remember when the PS4 launched people were streaming themselves having sex lmao.

VR is going to ruin my marriage but I'll risk it.

 

[spannicus]

VR is going to ruin my marriage but I'll risk it.

Hehehehe

 

[ValleyJoe]

[*]Reprojection was previously on as an option but now Sony has made it permanently on as it has no down-sides (contra keeping it off).

Is there any particular reason Oculus and HTC couldn't use a technique similar to what Sony is doing with Reprojection? If there are no drawbacks, you would think that implementing something like that could lower pc requirements. Why run at 90fps if you can do 60 and make it feel like 120 with a bit of trickery and apparently no downside? Is it just a totally different rendering method they're using that isn't applicable to the Rift/Vive? Is it something only Sony has figured out how to do? Seems unlikely. Just genuinely curious.

 

[Blanquito]

Is there any particular reason Oculus and HTC couldn't use a technique similar to what Sony is doing with Reprojection? If there are no drawbacks, you would think that implementing something like that could lower pc requirements. Why run at 90fps if you can do 60 and make it feel like 120 with a bit of trickery and apparently no downside? Is it just a totally different rendering method they're using that isn't applicable to the Rift/Vive? Is it something only Sony has figured out how to do? Seems unlikely. Just genuinely curious.

First thing that comes to mind is that you have to do an even multiple of the base frame rate, which means that Vive/Oculus would have to do 45->90, since their screens max out at 90. From what we've heard, though, 45 just doesn't cut it while 60 barely does.

 

[cheezcake]

Is there any particular reason Oculus and HTC couldn't use a technique similar to what Sony is doing with Reprojection? If there are no drawbacks, you would think that implementing something like that could lower pc requirements. Why run at 90fps if you can do 60 and make it feel like 120 with a bit of trickery and apparently no downside? Is it just a totally different rendering method they're using that isn't applicable to the Rift/Vive? Is it something only Sony has figured out how to do? Seems unlikely. Just genuinely curious.

They are it's just marketing, Sony calls it Reprojection, Oculus calls it Asynchronous Timewarp (ATW). SteamVR (Vive basically) doesn't actually have it, don't know if it's something they'll implement in the future or they're investigating other methods to reduce motion-to-photon latency.

Oculus blog post goes into the advantages and disadvantages of the technique

 

[Lister]

Is there any particular reason Oculus and HTC couldn't use a technique similar to what Sony is doing with Reprojection? If there are no drawbacks, you would think that implementing something like that could lower pc requirements. Why run at 90fps if you can do 60 and make it feel like 120 with a bit of trickery and apparently no downside? Is it just a totally different rendering method they're using that isn't applicable to the Rift/Vive? Is it something only Sony has figured out how to do? Seems unlikely. Just genuinely curious.

First thing that comes to mind is that you have to do an even multiple of the base frame rate, which means that Vive/Oculus would have to do 45->90, since their screens max out at 90. From what we've heard, though, 45 just doesn't cut it while 60 barely does.

PCVR DOES reprojection. Carmack pioneered the technique and it is present in current nvidia drivers. TheyJust call it by a different name.

Also this does not equal the same experience at a higher framerate. The output to your eyes is still 60 or 90 fps. It does mean lower latency when moving your head though.

This needs to be stressed. The output will not be the same as running the game at 120 fps. It's just that if you move your head around fast, the tracking will feel smoother than if it were being updated at just 60 fps. This is crucial for presence and so as not to get sick.

Sony has been pretty keen on having people belive that this makes games run at 120 fps. Or atleast thats what the marketing has insinuated so far, but this is not the case.

 

[Lister]

They are it's just marketing, Sony calls it Reprojection, Oculus calls it Asynchronous Timewarp (ATW). SteamVR (Vive basically) doesn't actually have it, don't know if it's something they'll implement in the future or they're investigating other methods to reduce motion-to-photon latency.

Oculus blog post goes into the advantages and disadvantages of the technique

This is a function of the gpu not the headset.

 

[Palculator]

The reason to get DOAX3.

 

[ValleyJoe]

Thanks for the explanation guys. I figured it was something similar to Asynchronous Timewarp, but wasn't entirely sure.

 

[cheesekao]

Sony has been pretty keen on having people belive that this makes games run at 120 fps. Or atleast thats what the marketing has insinuated so far, but this is not the case.

They've stated multiple times that that 120fps will be achieved through reprojection. Anyone who thinks that it'll natively run at 120fps either didn't read properly or are just being willfully ignorant.

 

[cheezcake]

This is a function of the gpu not the headset.

A function of the API, but yeh it's software side, don't think I implied differently?

 

[RadicalVelocity]

They've stated multiple times that that 120fps will be achieved through reprojection. Anyone who thinks that it'll natively run at 120fps either didn't read properly or are just being willfully ignorant.

No, that's one of 3 supported modes.

Native 60 -> Reprojected to 120
60 uniquely rendered frames, NO interpolation, with each frame being reprojected twice. Reprojection is used primarily to reduce the motion-to-photon latency in the VR pipeline, but is also used to 'update' a frame for 'reuse,' which is also used on Gear VR for when a title fails to maintain 60fps, and PC developers can implement for Oculus games when 90 is not maintained.

Native 90 -> Reprojected to 90
90 uniquely rendered frames, reprojected to reduce motion-to-photon latency, as many Rift games will do.

Native 120 -> Reprojected to 120
120 uniquely rendered frames, each reprojected to reduce motion-to-photon latency. This is a true framerate of 120fps, and any denial of this is ignorance on the part of platform zealots.

Edit: Native 120 demo

 

[Arkham]

Yeah. I am still surprised they are not doing a Move 2.0 and tweaking the button layout and ergonomics and whatnot.

Of course they will. They'll be branding it for PSVR and at the very least changing the Start/Select buttons to Share/Options.