He's supposed to be a CTO, so it's not surprising if he values more the better tech than the software compromises.
That's no excuse because VR tech is just as important as traditional graphics tech. What I've seen happen in many different areas is that sometimes people get locked into only a single way of seeing things and can't appreciate that there might be at times other qualities that can be just as important. This debate isn't even new. Before VR it was the 30/60 FPS vs graphical quality one. Some people are adamant that 60 FPS is the mare minimum for good gaming while others are willing to trade increased graphical quality for 30 FPS.
I played PSVR on a PS4 8 months ago. It was a legit experience. (EVE Valkyrie)
PS4K will be better, obviously, but the standard experience is in no way bad.
Yes, but you have a fixed factor, the framerate. Which mean you're forced to compromise. But you can't compromise too much, because you have another limiting factor, the resolution. Which is too low for VR (but acceptable for the first gen of VR). You can't compromise everything because it would just look bad, which can break immersion as well. Yes the style can be minimalist for the VR games, but the tech side still needs to be decent because of the resolution. So it's not that easy. And that's why I can see how a developer that usually produces impressive games might be annoyed by these constraints. That doesn't mean that the games will be bad.
So is the article just trying to fish for clicks or what?
The article doesn't actually says that the PSVR games are awful on PS4. Just that a CTO thinks that PS4 is an awful machine for PSVR. Which is a different thing. And hyperbolic. But that guy looks at it from the tech point of view, most probably.
It isn't because impressions from people who have used it on OG PS4s prove otherwise.I thought this was obvious. You need high end PC's to run good looking games on VR. Obviously a PS4 isn't enough, and so it's a no brainer that the Neo is in response to PSVR.
Can someone fill me in on who Matt is?If Matt says PS4 is fine, you can pretty much take it to the bank so yeah, this is a bit clickbait and its funny seeing people not read the thread and just jumping in here commenting lol.
Sounds like a bunch of bullshit hyperbole if we have the real specs.
I mean, if that were the case, instead of "truly awful" it'd just be "mildly terrible"? Oooookay.
And if we don't have the real specs and it's a huge leap they could just as easily wait until next year to reveal it, release it in 2018 and call it PS5. They'd sell way more units that way.
Sony just shot themselves in the foot.
I don't know how much the rest of you know about gamer culture (I'm an expert), but graphics and frame rate are huge parts of it. It's not like it is in movies where you can become successful by throwing in more explosions and lens flare. If you screw someone over in games, you bring shame to yourself, and the only way to get rid of that shame is repentance.
What this means is the PS4 owners, after hearing about this, is not going to want to purchase PSVR for either system, nor will they purchase any of Sony's games. This is HUGE. You can laugh all you want, but Sony has alienated an entire market with this move.
Sony, publicly apologize and cancel PS NEO or you can kiss your business goodbye.