I'm interested to see the tech used, but I won't be buying one. Buying VR on a console seems pointless to me with how limited you would be.
No, you’re either wired or wireless. It would be similar to how oculus quest handles pcvr. You can either use a long usb cable and play wired or you can play wireless through your 5ghz router or access point.The wire could be partial for some data and the rest is wireless?
I think the real play is to make it a hybrid headset just like the quest. Devs can easily port quest games over to a ps5 headset knowing it will have a big market and of course it could play psvr2 games either wired with usb, or wireless with a dongle, or using your home router/access point.It would be dumb for Sony to not give you option to play wirelessly. The tech is incredibly strong already and will be even better by the time this is ready.
I just can't see it having Foveated rendering, even Tobii eye tracking adds significant cost to headsets (as evidenced by the recent Pico Neo headset announcement). Foveated rendering still hasn't been done on any headset in any form beyond prototyping. I will happily eat crow and stand in line to get one if I'm wrong but I just don't see it.
Everything else sounds good, especially the controllers.
You are right but VirtualLink is dead.For data transfer sure. They could be keeping some secrets tho.
It is technically only 10 Gb/s for its function as a USB-C 3.2 Gen2x1 data transfer port. But it could have a higher bandwidth just for its use as a VR out port. Some people who looked at the PS5's SoC said the USB controllers appeared modified to support video out functionality.
Sony could be using something similar to VirtualLink:
"The available bandwidth is estimated to be equivalent to DisplayPort 1.4 (32.4 Gbit/s, up to 4K @ 120 Hz with 8 bpc color) for video and 10 Gbit/s of USB 3.1 Gen 2 data."
Notice how the PS5 uses 32 Gb/s for A/V and 10 Gb/s for data? Same as VirtualLink. Maybe not a coincidence?
Its not really speculation but more like common sense at this point. Its DisplayPort Altmode which works over USB connector. One of the earliest leaks of PS5 was the PCI ID associated with Ariel which showed 1 USB C with DP Altmode support.It would be speculation to suggest it’s capable of anything outside of the official specs. Virtual link also never caught on due to reliability issues.
It's when you lower the resolution away from the focal point, in headsets without eye tracking it means pixelated graphics when you are not looking straight ahead. But with the tracking it means you won't even notice it, literally free gpu power real-estate. Imagine something like a 20x graphics increase in VR
Aside from the user-friendly aspects, (compact, light, no cables, instant startup), VR won't just hold its place on the mainstream ecosystem until one of the platform holders goes all-in on the software, instead of treating it like a side peripheral.
Putting only a couple of AA games for the whole device lifespan won't matter much.
Here was the old leaked AMD testing data showing the same thing:It would be speculation to suggest it’s capable of anything outside of the official specs. Virtual link also never caught on due to reliability issues.
eat shit, fitness minigames fan
I love my Quest but if Sony pulls this off WITH wireless functionality I will drop it so fast. Add that with the rumors that epic offered to make a Sony exclusive launch title for PSVR2 and we might be getting more AAA vr titles. We need more games like Half Life Alyx.Here was the old leaked AMD testing data showing the same thing:
"Ariel" = PS5 APU (among other codenames)
"Ariel" chip has 2 USB-A 3.1 ports.. and a USB-C 3.1 port with DP Alt Mode..
Hmm.. PS5 also has 2 USB-A 3.1 ports and a USB-C 3.1 port..
Now why would the PS5 need a USB-C port with DisplayPort?
Sony have even said the front USB-A 2.0 port is for charging controllers, while the 2 USB-A ports on the back are for external storage and the new camera. But interestingly, Sony still have not said what that USB-C port on the front is for.. and none of their accessories use that port. Every PS5 accessory uses USB-A to connect to the console. I wonder why lol, its almost as if they know that port will need to be used for something else.
I'm not saying Sony will actually use the VirtualLink branding, but their own custom version. VL used 32 Gb/s for A/V and 10 Gb/s for USB, over a Type-C connection. And the PS5 SoC is capable of 32 Gb/s for A/V via its HDMI port, and 10 Gb/s for USB via its ports. So the system could simply switch on a displayport mode for its USB-C port, and send its A/V signal @32 Gb/s out to the headset via the USB-C port instead of via its HDMI port. It would allow Sony to send a 4k@120 signal and power and data along a single cable to the headset, as they have said it will be, all by using the conveniently placed port on the front of the console.
show images of the data
Here is someone disecting the PS5 SoC and saying it's DisplayPort via USB capable.
That's what foveated rendering is. It allows them to adjust the resolution based on your gaze and save a lot of rendering time.hopefully they’ll be able to utilize the eye tracking tech to increase performance because hard to see the ps5 running 4K vr at 90fps and above without some sacrifices in fidelity
I would think the performance gains of foveated rendering, plus the possible design advantages of gaze tracking would make it a solid step up from Index in some important ways.Will it compare to my valve index? Find out on the next episode of...
What’s a game for hardcore enthusiasts anyway? A game with a high budget and hours of cut scenes if we’re lucky we can skip? Lower budget games have frankly put a lot of AAA games to shame recently.eat shit, fitness minigames fan
Sony will use that wire to chokehold the Quest. To be fair, they're not competing, they're really different markets - one for fitness/social casual gamers, the other for hardcore enthusiasts who value their money and time enough not to bet on hackland pc.
once psvr2 is actually revealed along with a killer lineup, Zuck will be forever alone in Echo Arena fighting bots...
Resolution is what it is likely because of the needs of mass producing the headset. Custom displays at some peculiar resolution are likely to limit supply and/or drive up costs.Foveated rendering is cool, the adaptive triggers, etc. The vibrating headset.....not so sure about that, hard enough to keep the thing in place. Disappointed in the resolution, big step up from psvr, but no better than what's currently on the market, and it's not out for another year.......1080p overall just isn't enough to take vr to the next level.
That said, I'll probably still buy it and have fun with it.
Resolution is what it is likely because of the needs of mass producing the headset. Custom displays at some peculiar resolution are likely to limit supply and/or drive up costs.
That said, if you've actually used headsets like the Reverb G2, it actually looks damn good and if foveated rendering allows them to really take advantage of that res (and maybe even super-sample at center vision) you're not going to be thinking about resolution.
If this is true and the PS VR2 will support foveated rendering, it will bring a huge advantage, as the PS5 can render a high resolution image around 4K, which would not otherwise be possible with its GPU.
It's similar to VRS. Foveal area has 1x1 or supersampled, better than 1x1 shader quality ratio /high resolution/, Blend 2x2 /mid resolution/, Peripheral 4x4 /low resolution/ ..
A smooth 90 or 120hz 4k image that it will then effectively downscale to 1080p per eye. Sucks but true.
He means games like Asgard's Wrath and Half-Life Alyx, but made for PlayStation instead of dirty ol' PC.What’s a game for hardcore enthusiasts anyway? A game with a high budget and hours of cut scenes if we’re lucky we can skip? Lower budget games have frankly put a lot of AAA games to shame recently.
Yeah, I just don’t buy that oculus is nothing but mini games and fitness games for “filthy casuals.” There are AAA experiences to be had, admittedly more via link/airlink, but there are several excellent low budget titles I’m frankly having more fun with than their AAA counterparts. In death unchained, Demeo, Ancient Dungeon immediately come to mind in vr, and a game like Vailheim I’ve had more fun with than flat screen AAA titles.He means games like Asgard's Wrath and Half-Life Alyx, but made for PlayStation instead of dirty ol' PC.
VR is like Wii or 3DS. What works on systems like this isn't the same as just adding VR mode to modern flatlander games. IMO, that's the opposite of what makes VR cool. Unless we're talking racing/flying/sim games that are a natural fit.
RDR2 in VR would be janky and exhausting.
Do you think that's possible? I experienced VR sickness multiple times and I can't imagine how vibration could mitigate that.If it reduces motion sickness (ex. syncs the sound of footsteps/image movement with actual physical input), you might not want to do that.
Quest 2 has a fairly high resolution, a little less than this, but you've probably never played anything actually running at that native res (because it requires a certain amount of overdraw to compensate for distortion), so it's not really being used to it's full advantage. Most Quest 2 apps run well below native and even on Link with PC games, you need a beast of a PC to crank those Link settings up to their max res in most titles.It would have to be a big jump from quest 2 (my understanding is g2 is close) because I'm definately still thinking of resolution - the end product just can't look as real as it needs to to take that next step, when everything is limited by resolution - very much like 1080p vs 4k, but with a 80 or 90" screen. It makes a huge difference in larger screen sizes, which is effectively what a vr headset is doing, the equivalent of very large screen. Resolution matters. Also a 4k per eye screen would open it up to play 2d games on without sacrifice.
It's not all about the screen, but also the hardware powering it. The Quest 2 is still less powerful than a PS4 and a Quest 3 can't be much better running on a battery, even at 5nm. PS5 can run Resident Evil 8 at 4K60 with power to spare (ray tracing disabled); GT7 was running at 4K60. Those graphics on the equivalent of a 4K panel will be a sight to behold.It would have to be a big jump from quest 2 (my understanding is g2 is close) because I'm definately still thinking of resolution - the end product just can't look as real as it needs to to take that next step, when everything is limited by resolution - very much like 1080p vs 4k, but with a 80 or 90" screen. It makes a huge difference in larger screen sizes, which is effectively what a vr headset is doing, the equivalent of very large screen. Resolution matters. Also a 4k per eye screen would open it up to play 2d games on without sacrifice.