...Or it will just kill Sony's VR investment dead in it's tracks among the masses.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Developer: PS4 Neo exists because PVR was going to be awful on reg PS4s[debunked]
- Thread starter Matush
- Start date
- Status
...Or it will just kill Sony's VR investment dead in it's tracks among the masses.
get2sammyb
Member
I've played PlayStation VR on a standard PS4 and it's really impressive...?
Where people have took this idea that the impressions on PSVR are false or done on enhanced hardware?
PSVR and its software works fine for what it is on the normal PS4 but in the grand scheme of things and looking at the near future it's an hardware totally unfit for VR.
Heck, even high end pc and Oculus/Vive are not so good compared to what will be released in 2-3 years.
PSVR and its software works fine for what it is on the normal PS4 but in the grand scheme of things and looking at the near future it's an hardware totally unfit for VR.
Heck, even high end pc and Oculus/Vive are not so good compared to what will be released in 2-3 years.
DangerMouse
Member
This. Stylized titles make the most sense to take advantage of somewhat limited power.
MatrixMan.EXE
Member
Thread of exaggeration incoming. Oh wait, it's already started.
#NeoGAF.
#NeoGAF.
"VR needs lots of power" is currently the scapegoat of the week
Green Yoshi
Member
THE:MILKMAN
Member
Interesting if true (and still relevant today).
I'm still intrigued about the breakout box. I know Sony have categorically stated it is for 3D audio/social screen but don't they continue to be pretty secretive about it?
It seems it uses quite a few watts and even has a fan.
Maybe this box has a chip(s) that adds a surprising amount to the cost and Neo wouldn't need it?
I'm still intrigued about the breakout box. I know Sony have categorically stated it is for 3D audio/social screen but don't they continue to be pretty secretive about it?
It seems it uses quite a few watts and even has a fan.
Maybe this box has a chip(s) that adds a surprising amount to the cost and Neo wouldn't need it?
parappatherapper
Member
OléGunner;204707008 said:
Why? I thought the PSVR headset came with a separate processor inline that looks like a mini PS4.
Surely the PS4 neo is basically going to have that processor built in?
Are you implying that it does not? Because if so that's a very ignorant statement to make.
Whether Neo needs it or not is irrelevant when every PSVR SKU has it included and it's not something they can cut later because there are 40+ million PS4s in consumer homes which require it in order to function.
dragonfart28
Banned
VR and these 'new' consoles has just been a complete cluster fuck the last few months.
The console space is supposed to be convenient and easy.
The console space is supposed to be convenient and easy.
blackdevil
Member
it`s not a processor. It`s a device to bring the 2 pictures you get in your PSVR and make it one to show on your tv. Also it does something with the 3D audio.
It doesnt add more power to the ps4 .
You buy a PSVR, you plug it into your PS4, you put it on your head and you play a game. It doesn't get any easier than that.
Omnii-chan
Member
This is what I was thinking. No Neo consoles at PS VR events and from what I saw it was running fine.
The guy must have meant before the processing box.
It doesn't really matter, since Neo can't have games that are not possible on the base PS4.
Only if you consider 3+ years as "near future".
HandsomeCharles
Member
I doubt it. They've already started taking money for the PSVR, and if it didn't support the baseline PS4 at release then this would constitute false advertising.
ZehDon
Gold Member
Nope, not at all. The "processor" is just an HDMI splitter, to enable the social screen, and does some 3D audio stuff. It doesn't do anything to increase the power of the PS4. Given Sony's shipping the unit with every PSVR unit because its fundamentally required for the device to operate, building an HDMI splitter into the PS4 Neo is pointless.
As for the quote in the OP, it's a fairly broad statement that is vaguely worded from an anonymous source of unknown repute, that is picked apart in the next quoted passage. Given that Sony has only demonstrated PSVR on launch hardware, facts to date really call into question the expertise and knowledge of the person making the claim. Given that PSVR is often cited as providing a VR experience on par with the other HMDs, the claim appears demonstrably false. I'm not giving the benefit of the doubt, given all signs point to this claim being out of date, unsubstantiated, or simply fabricated.
dragonfart28
Banned
The whole purpose of this thread is that the original PS4 may not be ideal for using VR.
And then you get into different configurations between the two systems which could result in different experiences.
And the fact that it is a bulky accessory that takes up additional space/power options.
And that it's costly because they are introducing this tech too early.
Sony and MS should have just let the 5 year cycle (or longer if needed) just ride itself out and then release new consoles with VR already integrated at a cheaper price or just make VR a stand-alone technology instead of requiring it to be bolted onto a console.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
The perspective depends on what technology that CTO has experience of/is talking about.
I mean, if you consider what if they are used to dealing with engines that have significant issues maintaining frame-rate due to their relative inefficiency (e.g Unity or CryEngine) they are far more likely to throw the hardware under the bus rather than cop to the fact that their middleware of choice is a big part of the problem.
A single anonymous source is far from conclusive proof of anything, and treating it as such is just daft.
I mean, if you consider what if they are used to dealing with engines that have significant issues maintaining frame-rate due to their relative inefficiency (e.g Unity or CryEngine) they are far more likely to throw the hardware under the bus rather than cop to the fact that their middleware of choice is a big part of the problem.
A single anonymous source is far from conclusive proof of anything, and treating it as such is just daft.
UnluckyKate
Member
Current project work well for psvr
But future aaa and other game will need ps4k to deliver definitive experience in vr and not cut half the graphic quality.
Seem easy to understand
But future aaa and other game will need ps4k to deliver definitive experience in vr and not cut half the graphic quality.
Seem easy to understand
Filthy Casual
Member
I was interested in PS VR but if I have to buy a Neo as well for it to be any good then I'm out.
blackdevil
Member
Optimisation is the key word here!
you can get much more out of the Console GPU than the PC counterapart. You have one setup on console the dev can work with. You have to consider 100 possibilities on pc because of the different hardware setups people have.
That`s why you won`t get ps4 graphics with the same hardware on pc.
The same game, better framerate is the difference between motion sickness and no motion sickness in VR. I'm not saying that the VR games on PS4 will make you sick, but it really seems to be at the very minimum required for VR.
But we perfectly know the real vr killer app will be tailor made and designed with vr in mind anyway..
No of course not. But I've seen it used as the reason for ps4k existing, as a way to force ps4 owners to upgrade, as a reason for why Gtan Turismo is seemingly shit, and as a reason behind the Scorpio
Yes it needs power but by all accounts PSVR is well balanced against the performance of the PS4. And pretty soon the performance needed on PC should be a lot more affordable with Polaris
Amauri14
Member
How can these people can be considered reporters if they cannot even get in their heads that the external unit does not offer any additional power boost.
Strictly speaking you are right Neo can't have games that do not run on base PS4 but you will have completely different experiences between playing a game at PS2 level of detail at a mere 60fps with the original PS4 against a more advanced looking game at a more human 90fps that you'll have with Neo.
Let's be frank here, PSVR is the poor men's VR experience just to give people something until things get better and will be more so with the original PS4, for example the "you can't drop below 60fps" rule would be at a much more stricter "you can't drop below 90fps" if the original PS4 wasn't supported because that's the minimum threshold for a good VR experience today.
Of course this isn't the case 100% of the time but it's something.
Plus this -
And all the impressions from trade shows am going with this might have been the case once upon a time before some key optimisations/improvements were made otherwise the "was" doesn't really make sense here to me.
Also I guess it could also be more of the fact that as things more demanding the gap in experience between PS4 and Neo will be more apparent.
I'm not surprised if this is true. Most PSVR titles on the launch PS4 will probably run at 60FPS and use the breakout box to interpolate to 120fps to avoid motion sickness. The PS4-Neo may run the same titles at a native 90fps with boosted visuals.
It does make me reconsider my PSVR pre-order. Going from $500 to $900+ for the ideal experience is a little steep, especially with the history of console addons/accessories and long-term support.
It does make me reconsider my PSVR pre-order. Going from $500 to $900+ for the ideal experience is a little steep, especially with the history of console addons/accessories and long-term support.
Krisprolls
Banned
Yeah that's clickbait bullshit again. Every PSVR preview / test said it ran pretty well on native PS4.
Nothing to see here.
There is more chance of Sony exiting the console space tomorrow than not being able to run PSVR on current machines.
Expect the breakout box can't do this.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1190816&page=1
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1189622
And that's the wrong logic.
To the contrary, there is a big difference between VR and normal gaming.
In normal gaming, you will see games being below 30fps or with crappy resolution on vanilla PS4, cause dev can do it. They did it already on XBO and even PS4, so why not.
Now in VR, it's really different. You HAVE to have something stable and comfortable or it's just unbearable for people. That means vanilla PS4 VR games will HAVE to be at least 60fps with 120fps simulated, which seems to work nicely.
Those vr games will have to run well on normal PS4, no matter how. And they will be tailor made for it. There is no choice.
None of those statement are true anyway, by simple logic.
There is what, almost 10 times more gflop between a PS3 and a PS4... How does doubling the power of a PS4 will be a gap from PS3 to PS4 graphics.. It would be more something like same graphics but 60fps > 90 or 120fps But in the end that'll mean the difference if simulated 120fps against true one, and how much will people see the difference, we'll see it.
And when people saying PS3, or PS2 graphic. It's never really that simple. Just look at current PSVR games. They'll have modern shaders and textures, so PS3, or even PS2 geometry doesn't mean same graphics.
So what have we had so far from "sources":
1)Neo was made because a die shrink investment was more expensive than a new chip
2)Neo was made because MS was doing the same
3)Neo was made because PSVR is not good on standard PS4.
Considering the fact that there was multiple demos of PSVR on launch consoles I would say the last one is complete hyperbole.
1)Neo was made because a die shrink investment was more expensive than a new chip
2)Neo was made because MS was doing the same
3)Neo was made because PSVR is not good on standard PS4.
Considering the fact that there was multiple demos of PSVR on launch consoles I would say the last one is complete hyperbole.
I don't know if i quite got the point of your post but mine was an exaggeration to emphasize the different experience you get from one hardware to the other.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
Yeah I didn't really think that through...
Yet something feels real off about PSVR with the way it was unveiled at GDC (low key IMO) and coming out later than thought and even the difficulties in pre-ordering.
All real odd.
ZehDon said:
But would that require so much power? The box is said to come with a 36 watt rated PSU and using Sony's other PlayStation hardware as a guide I would guess that would translate to ~20W at the wall.
My whole PC built 6 weeks ago (albeit without a GPU ATM) is using 23W at the wall right now browsing Gaf.
Opus Angelorum
Member
This simply sounds like a reference to the state of PSVR running without the breakout box, nothing more.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll