A lot of posts here are implying that Sony needs the PC userbase in order for PSVR to succeed, which is a crock of shit. The amount of hardware Sony could potentially sell on PC is irrelevant to them since they will not make money on hardware, their profits will be from software publishing. They won't sell their software on PC, so they won't make money. As kyser73 mentioned, there are extra costs for developing for PC that they aren't incurring right now that would cause a hardware project that already is expected to only break even at best to go into loss.
These posts read more like PC VR hopefuls are scared that the likes of the Rift and Vive are going to be so expensive that PC VR might end up DoA. They want Sony to enter the PC market to offer an affordable option, even though doing so would effectively be charity by Sony with how the PSVR is going to be priced.
I think it's a commentary about people like you that want this piece of shit on PC, when there are like 8 other VR headets coming exclusively to PC.
Why even entertain this idea if it's such a shitty product.
I just assume that's what you meant when you're saying it's "the most inferior hardware" while there are lots of known VR HMD's.
Why someone would want it on PC and Sony makes a mistake for not releasing it when simultaneously saying it's the worst was quite confusing, as you can imagine.
I don't think it would have much of any effect. If you see the arguments in that other thread for why people chose PSVR, it's usually either (a) they already have a PS4 and not a PC, or (b) exclusives. Neither of those would apply on PC.
There's nothing about the hardware itself that would make it more desirable on PC compared to Vive or the RIft.
In any case, Sony obviously have no motivation to do that -- they want to sell this thing as cheap as possible and make money back from selling software in their proprietary ecosystem.
I perfectly understand the argument that people would like to buy a psvr and use it on their ps4 anc pc. It's perfectly reasonable. But I have yet to see a compelling argument to support the idea that Sony not going for that is bad for them.
The only thing that would make a bit more sense for sony financially would be to leave the ps4 open to OR/Vive support. But I doubt facebook or htc/valve would even care.
I think that post above is implying that the PC players (not the makers) who are interested in VR are afraid of Oculus & Vive being considerably more expensive than PSVR and can't afford either HMD's, so they (the PC players) want Morpheus to be compatible with PC as its assumed to be the cheapest of the three consumer HMD releases.
Personally I'd want the best of both worlds, PSVR for PS4 for it's exclusives & Vive for PC but I can understand where the PC-only players are coming from if they want the cheapest solution on their platform, though it's never gonna happen "officially" (I say this again, FOSS developers are not extinct people, give'em some time as PSVR isn't even out yet - maybe even GearVR...) and I also understand that it doesn't make business sense in the slightest for SONY as they are not a charity/nonprofit organization (given the rumor that the PSVR being sold at no profit per unit ends up being true).
I just assume that's what you meant when you're saying it's "the most inferior hardware" while there are lots of known VR HMD's.
Why someone would want it on PC and Sony makes a mistake for not releasing it when simultaneously saying it's the worst was quite confusing, as you can imagine.
I am only comparing it to oculus rift and htc vive. I have tried it and have tossed lots of praises and it still has its issues. Its still the most inferior hardware despite it being good.
I will be getting both ps vr and oculus rift there
A lot of posts here are implying that Sony needs the PC userbase in order for PSVR to succeed, which is a crock of shit. The amount of hardware Sony could potentially sell on PC is irrelevant to them since they will not make money on hardware, their profits will be from software publishing. They won't sell their software on PC, so they won't make money. As kyser73 mentioned, there are extra costs for developing for PC that they aren't incurring right now that would cause a hardware project that already is expected to only break even at best to go into loss.
These posts read more like PC VR hopefuls are scared that the likes of the Rift and Vive are going to be so expensive that PC VR might end up DoA. They want Sony to enter the PC market to offer an affordable option, even though doing so would effectively be charity by Sony with how the PSVR is going to be priced.
PSVR compatible with a PC VR SDK or whatever would solidify my desire for one.
At the moment, owning a PC approximately in the graphic power range of the Xbone I want the PSVR, Something that is plug and play, just works etc. is a huge draw - and some of the software looks pretty cool (though not confirmed exclusive).
At the same time, my PC in 3 years will probably blow away the PS4 and Xbone, and there are probably going to be many games and other media between now and then that don't necessarily require a top end graphical powerhouse.
I don't necessarily need Sony to make the PSVR compatible with PC, just don't lock it down. Allow people to hack drivers/utilities together to emulate another VR. Sony has been pretty good with DualShock controllers (admittedly a lot simpler to hack to get to work on PC)... hopefully it is the same with PSVR.
Rockefellers. Skull and Bones. Microsoft. Al Qaeda. A Cabal of Bankers. The melting point of steel. What do these things have in common? Wake up sheeple, the landfill wasn't even REAL!
Self-inflated view of importance and some hilarious next-gen 'port begging'.
Here's the facts - PC players with a good enough rig AND just enough funds to support only 1 VR platform in the immediate future is so small that I doubt Sony even registers it as a statistical anomaly when doing market research. The amount of extra shit they would have to do to get the PSVR compatible with PCs is not insignificant however. For reasons stated by many posters already, it's actually a huge hurdle with its own challenges and complications.
High risk, low reward - at least at this junction. Maybe when the next generation rolls around and VR has hit the big time and (and their higher-end cousins have gotten massively cheaper) then they can rethink the closed system and try to compete in the PC and phone VR spaces. In fact, I'm pretty sure that's the plan. But, in this extremely important beginning phase, stay in your lane and just work on what you know and are comfortable with. Evolve your own chosen platform and then build on that success later.
tldr version: Rome wasn't built in a day, so don't overextend yourself for a very, very, very small minority.
I just don't see the upside for Sony. If they are selling it at cost or at a loss, they have to recoup that in software. You're basically asking them to sell it at the same price, develop an adapter for the PS camera, and develop drivers to work with Windows...all for what? So they can sell more hardware at cost or at a loss? What's the gain for them?
The potential gain for them is shipping the most units across all platforms which is how you gain and maintain meaningful 3rd party support beyond the initial wave of "yeah, we're there." games.
Could also factor into their longer term goals that feature more than just the PS4, people need to take that into consideration.
That said I don't think it is going to happen outside of a bundle that would cost significantly more than its PS4 sibling.
Let's see some spreadsheets where you can demonstrate this large, untapped and profitable market.
What no-one is talking about is:
1. Driver development. If Sony do this, they're providing the drivers themselves, not relying on 'the community' to mod it in. This requires ongoing development of said driver to take new its of PC or VE yech into account. Costs money.
2. Support. Sony are a CE giant, not a startup. If they make PSVR PC compatible they'll have to fully support it via help desk, community relations and the rest of it, all to a market that expects everything to be for free. Costs money & there's always a PR risk.
3. Retool and have a separate SKU for the camera since it has a proprietary connector. Again, costs money.
1. There's a difference between actively supporting something, and allowing something. Sony didn't go out of their way to make DS4 drivers, but others did, and made special software for it.
2. See 1. Do they have to do that for DS4?
3. Don't have to make a camera for it because it wouldn't be officially supported by Sony. Other people could likely make regular webcams or something work.
It's not exactly port begging. Just like people made the DualShock 3 work on PC, I'm hoping someone will do the same. Was hoping that the DualShock 4 would work on PC "hilarious next-gen port begging"? Guess what, DS4 just like the DS3 works fantastically on PC.
How much information do we really have the size of this?
Sure we can get a range, and say it's probably in the very low range of it. But do we actually know?
A lot of posts here are implying that Sony needs the PC userbase in order for PSVR to succeed, which is a crock of shit. The amount of hardware Sony could potentially sell on PC is irrelevant to them since they will not make money on hardware, their profits will be from software publishing. They won't sell their software on PC, so they won't make money. As kyser73 mentioned, there are extra costs for developing for PC that they aren't incurring right now that would cause a hardware project that already is expected to only break even at best to go into loss.
These posts read more like PC VR hopefuls are scared that the likes of the Rift and Vive are going to be so expensive that PC VR might end up DoA. They want Sony to enter the PC market to offer an affordable option, even though doing so would effectively be charity by Sony with how the PSVR is going to be priced.
Why does everyone keep talking like they aren't going to sell any software?
PC users aren't likely to be buying this. It's going to be PS4/PC users, who actually have a PS4 to be buying software for. And they would.
It's not that Sony needs it, that's not what anything is about.
You don't look at something, and say "will it do well without this?" "Should we make an Uncharted 4, even though the PS4 has already sold 30 million?" "No, the PS2 should not play DVD's because we're not going to make any money on the DVD's sold, and so we should disable it." Is that really how it works?
It's not about finding ways to make it successful that without it would fail. It's about maximizing the chance for success. I don't think anyone anywhere is arguing it would fail without it. There's just a lot that's unknown that could potentially mean the PSVR could fail, and having such features increase the chance of success.
By all standards the PS Move could've been a success.The Wii was a success before it, but it didn't do well.
It's easy to pull up poll data and say it looks like it'll do well. That's not always what happens.
In any case, Sony obviously have no motivation to do that -- they want to sell this thing as cheap as possible and make money back from selling software in their proprietary ecosystem.
To be fair here - at stage we're in - establishing a dominant VR ecosystem is pretty much what all 3 are after, except Valve and Sony already have their software platforms ready for it.
But I'd flip this the other way - what do you think are the chances of Valve/Oculus to make their headsets compatible with consoles? (let's assume the platform holders are interested for the sake of argument)
With no publishing capacity outside of their target platforms, none of the HMD makers right now have much incentive to target anything else - yet.
But as I said, making it PC compatible is a massive undertaking. It won' be a hobby modification, they need to support a myriad of configurations and provide appropriate API's. And do we know how much it will cost? Would Sony even want to subsidize VR experience on PC's, if they sell at manufacturing price, let alone below it? Or would they rather sell games on the PS4?
PS VR is obviously targeting those people interested in VR who won't be able to afford high end PC's. They really don't, and shouldn't need to, care about the dozens of people who has a PS4 and a VR capable PC that are interested in VR gaming AND doesn't want to miss out on PS4 VR offerings AND doesn't care about PC specific VR features: The more time they refine the experience on the PS4, the better it is for their own platform. PC, as noted here, will have several options (I thought there were about 3, but it turns out there's even more)
It's not a massive undertaking for a corporation like Sony. Releasing driver isn't some heavy investment either.
If they sell at or under price, it will become profitable within a reasonable timeframe. That's how produaction works. Being the market leader and having market penetration is something you wanna invest into. It would also push people who HAVE A PS4 (like myself) and want to use it on PC for everything else. Hands down, VR offers a LOT more than just "gaming" and Sony can't and won't satisfy that need. You don't need a beefy PC for that either, that's why this is the most elegant solution.
VR is entirely new thing and can't be compared with other peripherals, let alone the unique cost point. People won't buy "two VR glasses". Sony should do everything to make people get theirs. Just read how many people are PS4 AND PC users. Sony would lose quite a few sales from software if they don't push people into buying theirs.
If they sell at or under price, it will become profitable within a reasonable timeframe. That's how produaction works. Being the market leader and having market penetration is something you wanna invest into.
What benefit would being the market leader (I assume you mean selling the most units) have if you have two SKUs and games aren't compatible between them.
The whole thing isn't compatible with the ARPPU goal of SCE.
1. There's a difference between actively supporting something, and allowing something. Sony didn't go out of their way to make DS4 drivers, but others did, and made special software for it.
2. See 1. Do they have to do that for DS4?
3. Don't have to make a camera for it because it wouldn't be officially supported by Sony. Other people could likely make regular webcams or something work.
It's not exactly port begging. Just like people made the DualShock 3 work on PC, I'm hoping someone will do the same. Was hoping that the DualShock 4 would work on PC "hilarious next-gen port begging"? Guess what, DS4 just like the DS3 works fantastically on PC.
How much information do we really have the size of this?
Sure we can get a range, and say it's probably in the very low range of it. But do we actually know?
Why does everyone keep talking like they aren't going to sell any software?
PC users aren't likely to be buying this. It's going to be PS4/PC users, who actually have a PS4 to be buying software for. And they would.
It's not that Sony needs it, that's not what anything is about.
You don't look at something, and say "will it do well without this?" "Should we make an Uncharted 4, even though the PS4 has already sold 30 million?" "No, the PS2 should not play DVD's because we're not going to make any money on the DVD's sold, and so we should disable it." Is that really how it works?
It's not about finding ways to make it successful that without it would fail. It's about maximizing the chance for success. I don't think anyone anywhere is arguing it would fail without it. There's just a lot that's unknown that could potentially mean the PSVR could fail, and having such features increase the chance of success.
By all standards the PS Move could've been a success.The Wii was a success before it, but it didn't do well.
It's easy to pull up poll data and say it looks like it'll do well. That's not always what happens.
So your business advice to Sony is 'Don't worry about consumer blowback from people buying your thing and you not providing any support, 'the community' will sort it all out.'
Yes it is. And thus, they want to reap 100% of the benefits. You buying a PSVR headset to use your PC removes you from their ecosystem and future value as both a consumer and player.
If they sell at or under price, it will become profitable within a reasonable timeframe. That's how produaction works. Being the market leader and having market penetration is something you wanna invest into. It would also push people who HAVE A PS4 (like myself) and want to use it on PC for everything else. Hands down, VR offers a LOT more than just "gaming" and Sony can't and won't satisfy that need. You don't need a beefy PC for that either, that's why this is the most elegant solution.
Spoken like someone with no concept of business. They are already the market leader and do not care about any other device that can play VR that is not connected to a PS4 for the end-user. They will have more than games, as Yoshida already said. You want to win, you leverage what you already have.
VR is entirely new thing and can't be compared with other peripherals, let alone the unique cost point. People won't buy "two VR glasses". Sony should do everything to make people get theirs. Just read how many people are PS4 AND PC users. Sony would lose quite a few sales from software if they don't push people into buying theirs.
Yes it can. And I'd imagine that as time goes on, Sony will do quite a bit to get people to buy into their ecosystem, but it only works if you get a PSVR, a PS4, Plus, a few games and then join your friends to play for a few years. They aren't going to lose massive software sales because the audience don't actually have a lot of buying overlap--popular games are available on both platforms and both are healthy. Them offering PSVR with PC compatibility is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
The potential gain for them is shipping the most units across all platforms which is how you gain and maintain meaningful 3rd party support beyond the initial wave of "yeah, we're there." games.
I'm laughing at this statement. They already have all 3rd party support because they're the market leader. No 3rd party makes games to be there--they make them to sell or someone is funding it.
A PS4/PC gamer like myself has to choose between the two. I'd like to be able to buy PSVR games, and PC games, but can't afford both.
I feel like the vast majority of people here are missing the argument.
It wouldn't be a loss for Sony.
It seems some just want this without a PS4, or are worried about the Oculus price.
Tough. If you want VR next year, it'll be one or the other. If you can't have both, then pick the one that does it for you.
Expecting companies sinking millions into products and ecosystems to accommodate people with both is delusional.
It's like Apple and Android--they share apps, common functionality, but the services and phone compete with one another. It's one or the other.
Or, you know, you could wait and see what the rest of the experience is like.
And yet, plenty of people already told you in every thread that there IS a problem that is EASILY fixable. But hey, live in denial about it, if it works for you. Sony has nothing to lose here and only to gain, but since you are the expert of "business" and declared them the market leader with 0 sold-through unites (Occulus doesn't exist for you right?) you must be right.
Sony does not support the DS4 on PC, regardless of whether or not it works. If you call Sony support complaining that your DS4 is not working on your PC, they will tell you to fuck off.
Sony's peripherals for the PS4 are supported on PS4 only. Same with getting a DS4 to work wired on a PS3. Possible, but not supported.
I very much doubt PSVR will be compatible with PC. They want people buying into the PS platform, not using the hardware, which is bound to be sold at or close to a loss, being used in a different ecosystem where they do not control licensing.
And yet, plenty of people already told you in every thread that there IS a problem that is EASILY fixable. But hey, live in denial about it, if it works for you. Sony has nothing to lose here and only to gain, but since you are the expert of "business" and declared them the market leader with 0 sold-through unites (Occulus doesn't exist for you right?) you must be right.
The only ones in denial are the ones that want them to focus on a smaller portion of the market for absolutely no reason. Plenty of others have said something similar, as it makes no sense. It isn't a problem so much as people wanting their cake and eating it too.
They are the market leader for the PS4, and thus, already have a head-start vs every possible PC. There's been a few surveys done that indicate people are more open to the idea of it attached to the PS4. Boy, I wonder which one they should focus on.
It's not rocket science. Keep people on the platform, reap rewards.
It's also important to note that VR in general isn't expected to have a large userbase for a while. In that time, prices, hardware and tech will improve and get cheaper, and we'll also know if any of the makers have to change strategy.
PSCR support will very likely not see official support on PC from sony. But it's inevitable that it will get hacked in. I mean, all it is is an HDMI breakout box that does extra image processing...
I hope someone can make drivers eventually and get it to work on pc. I think there's a good chance of that happening. It's why this is far more attractive to me than the rift. The rift will never ever work on the ps4.
So your business advice to Sony is 'Don't worry about consumer blowback from people buying your thing and you not providing any support, 'the community' will sort it all out.'
Yes it is. And thus, they want to reap 100% of the benefits. You buying a PSVR headset to use your PC removes you from their ecosystem and future value as both a consumer and player.
It seems some just want this without a PS4, or are worried about the Oculus price.
Tough. If you want VR next year, it'll be one or the other. If you can't have both, then pick the one that does it for you.
Expecting companies sinking millions into products and ecosystems to accommodate people with both is delusional.
It's like Apple and Android--they share apps, common functionality, but the services and phone compete with one another. It's one or the other.
What exactly is the difference between this and the DS4 or DS3, that is so great, that one being on PC is acceptable and the other is absolutely impossible for Sony to work out? Neither is officially supported by Sony, why can't they both be compatible?
The main aspects of the PSVR are a
-Display
-A camera to track it.
The second part is the only thing of reasonable difficulty. But it is something that users would likely be able to work out. I'd argue the biggest reason PS Move doesn't have any support on PC, is because there has yet to be any reason to.
It's not rocket science. Keep people on the platform, reap rewards.
It's also important to note that VR in general isn't expected to have a large userbase for a while. In that time, prices, hardware and tech will improve and get cheaper, and we'll also know if any of the makers have to change strategy.
Yes, and losing DS4 exclusivity was a terrible thing for PS4, and they're dying.
I mean why would anyone buy Batman on PS4 when you can play it on PC with better graphics and still use that DS4 controller.
Do we really know how small or large the "small portion" is? It's likely bigger than we might think.
Exactly, VR is going to be having a hard time. Sony should do anything they can to increase support for the PS4.
Additionally, they would be keeping people on the platform. As it stands, they likely have a far larger chance of losing people on the platform if PSVR is completely incompatible with PC.
Comparing a controller that retails for $60 to an entire new platform and saying "There's no difference!".
Or, comparing tech that is lower end and meant for easy replacement vs gateway to ecosystem for future growth.
Keep trying.
They simply don't need to do it. The audience size isn't large enough ("dozens of us" comes to mind). I just think you personally want this vs seeing the reasons about why it doesn't make actual sense.
What exactly is the difference between this and the DS4 or DS3, that is so great, that one being on PC is acceptable and the other is absolutely impossible for Sony to work out? Neither is officially supported by Sony, why can't they both be compatible?
The main aspects of the PSVR are a
-Display
-A camera to track it.
The second part is the only thing of reasonable difficulty. But it is something that users would likely be able to work out. I'd argue the biggest reason PS Move doesn't have any support on PC, is because there has yet to be any reason to.
Yes, and losing DS4 exclusivity was a terrible thing for PS4, and they're dying.
I mean why would anyone buy Batman on PS4 when you can play it on PC with better graphics and still use that DS4 controller.
Do we really know how small or large the "small portion" is? It's likely bigger than we might think.
Exactly, VR is going to be having a hard time. Sony should do anything they can to increase support for the PS4.
Additionally, they would be keeping people on the platform. As it stands, they likely have a far larger chance of losing people on the platform if PSVR is completely incompatible with PC.
Do you know what opportunity costs are? Sony don't have an unlimited supply of money. What's a better use of the money they do have?
Having hundreds of millions of dollars tied up in inventory supplying discount headsets to PC gamers in the hopes that a handful of them will pick up a PS4 and a copy of RIGS rather than endlessly arguing that if Sony really wanted to be successful, they'd just port RIGS to Windows.
Having hundreds of millions of dollars tied up in the development of another half-dozen games of the quality of RIGS.
If you buy a PSVR, chances are you'll also buy PSVR software on your PS4. And don't forget that the cost of making these headsets will quickly become less and less expensive. Look at GearVR, that thing costs a measly 99 bucks now (which probably means Samsung produces these things for 30-50 bucks -> Buy it for a dollar, sell it for two). 2 years from now, I'd guess that Sony can probably produce these things for 50 bucks a pop. Compare this to Sony potentially handing the VR market over to Oculus and Valve and your argument suddenly doesn't really make sense anymore.
Okay, so it seems that you do understand how businesses work. You just need to think things through a bit more.
"Buy it for a dollar, sell it for two," you say, and right you are. That's why we're here; to make money. Right? Sony's business model for their consoles is a little more complicated though. "Build it for a dollar, sell it for a dollar, then license ten accessories for it that earn us a dime each, including one we made ourselves that hopefully profits ten or twenty cents all on its own." You're basically saying that they should set up a charity wing of their business, skipping the part of the process where they earn a return on their investment, basically entirely for the purpose of providing low-cost hardware to someone else's customers. As you say, a couple of those people might buy the 1st-party PSVR game that earns Sony ~15¢ but Sony are supposed to be looking for a $1 return on every $1 they invest, not 15¢ on a few of the dollars and 0¢ on the rest of them, right?
Another point you don't seem to have thought through is manufacturing costs. You correctly point out that manufacturing costs for the headsets will drop — especially if they're making lots of them —Â but forget the fact that by the time the headset costs half as much to build, they'll be selling it for half as much as well, just as they do with the PS4. So again, there's no opportunity for them to profit down the road, meaning you're still arguing they operate as a charity.
Also, I think you're grossly overestimating the number of Rift-class PCs that there are and will be compared to PS4s. You point out that there were nearly a million people with a 970 or better as of like six months ago, right?
Where'd you get that number anyway?
So after about eight months of global availability, 970-or-better processors still hadn't equalled what Sony sold in a single day of availability, just in North America. Yet you argue that in the immediate future, so many of these cards will be sold that PS4 will struggle to even remain an afterthought?? Srsly? Even if we ignore the facts that this clearly isn't happening, and that it never really has happened since console rose to prominence, then why should Sony even bother at all? Isn't their best course of action to shutter their console business as quickly as possible and jump on board the W10 bandwagon?
Oh, here's another argument of yours that's only half-valid. You correctly point out that Sony will be lucky if 20% of PS4 owners end up buying a PSVR, but then act as though every single one of these billions of imaginary Rift-class PC owners are gonna buy some form of VR, so Sony better do whatever they can to make sure the one they buy works on PlayStation too*, so it's not doomed to total irrelevancy, at least.
Why would a PC owner, hoping to play in VR (which obviously includes 3D)
why would this user buy a PSVR, when he needs his Gaming PC to handle VR/3D games?... all to "just" play in 1080p?
instead of 2180p or what ever those resolutions are on Rift and Vive. I know the PSVR's pixals are designed differently to still come off better than other 1080p screens... but again, this is a user who spent alot of money on his PC...I'm sure he/she will want to play on a higher resolution, than *1080p*.
and if there is a userbase who have gaming PCs that can only handle VR at 1080p... how Big is this userbase? Is it worth it for Sony?
Well, there are lots of reasons a PC gamer might choose PSVR over one of the others. First and foremost, it sounds like it's gonna cost half of what the other headsets costs. I mean, lolSony, but that's a significant factor if all of these developers are telling the truth and it really does work just fine.
Also, there are a lot of PC gamers who believe frame rate is king, and that group is likely to grow substantially with the advent of VR (even on consoles, actually). PSVR is lower resolution than the others, but it's the only headset than can handle full 120 fps gaming. If a game targets 90 fps on Rift or Vive, simply dropping the res to 1080p might be enough to hit 120 fps on PSVR, assuming you can still get your physics and stuff done in time.
Plus, the lower specs will simply make the tech accessible to more gamers in general, because they won't need such a beefy machine to make it work. Maybe some PC devs would make games that have a 950 as a minimum recommendation instead, if they knew there were millions of users out there with a headset that could handle 1080p60, or 60 fps at all. (Really, the only reason Oculus and Valve don't allow 60 fps with frame doubling on their headsets is because they weren't able to get their hands on 120 Hz displays, and 45->90 just isn't good enough.)
You suppose it's a coincidence that after a few tweets from Palmer implying high prices, the narrative coming from the PC camp mostly went from "lolSony" to "Sony not allowing me to use their at-cost headset on my PC is simply Unjust"?
1. There's a difference between actively supporting something, and allowing something. Sony didn't go out of their way to make DS4 drivers, but others did, and made special software for it.
That's all you really care about? The ability to hack support for it? Go for it. I can't imagine enough people will try that Sony will bother to try and stop you. Just don't complain if it turns out to be really hard.
----------------------------------------
*Okay, so let me ask everyone this. If PC stuff is supposed to be so open and flexible, why aren't you pestering Oculus and Valve/HTC for PS4 support from their headsets? If they're so unlocked and egalitarian, they should work to make sure it works on your PS4 too, right?
Well, I suppose there's the facts that they don't meet Sony's technical requirements, like the 120 Hz display and the 3D audio chip, but let's imagine that they did. There's no reason for them to not have it working on the PS4, right? It's not like Sony would block them. Why would they care? They're selling their own headsets at cost, so it makes no difference to them where you get the headset that allows you to play RIGS and EVE:Valkyrie on your PS4. They wouldn't care if your headset was Samsung any more than they care if your TV is. All they care about is selling PlayStation games, and if Oculus and Valve wanna help make it so they can sell more, great!
So aren't Oculus and Valve the ones you guys should be pestering to get their shit together here? Hurry up and make a v2 with a 120 Hz display that'll work on your PS4, and in the meantime, you can just play RIGS and Valkyrie on the ultra-affordable PSVR while you save up and wait for a decent PC headset to finally be released.
1. There's a difference between actively supporting something, and allowing something. Sony didn't go out of their way to make DS4 drivers, but others did, and made special software for it.
And what do you want from Sony than?
Sony most probably will do nothing to actively stop enthusiast from trying to make a custom driver. The problem is how well it will work, as it is implied now that games themselves provide image in compatible to PSVR format, and thus you'll need some hacks to emulate it on PC for a game that natively does not support it (and it'll probably be different from formats Vive or OR use).
And hacks never works with 100% accuracy.
That's all you really care about? The ability to hack support for it? Go for it. I can't imagine enough people will try that Sony will bother to try and stop you. Just don't complain if it turns out to be really hard.
*Okay, so let me ask everyone this. If PC stuff is supposed to be so open and flexible, why aren't you pestering Oculus and Valve/HTC for PS4 support from their headsets? If they're so unlocked and egalitarian, they should work to make sure it works on your PS4 too, right?
So aren't Oculus and Valve the ones you guys should be pestering to get their shit together here? Hurry up and make a v2 with a 120 Hz display that'll work on your PS4, and in the meantime, you can just play RIGS and Valkyrie on the ultra-affordable PSVR while you save up and wait for a decent PC headset to finally be released.
Different people there seem to be saying different things.
The creator seems to be very against it, but I've seen a few other people who were saying it was a possibility.
Overall, I think it's more likely for Sony to support PC, than OR to support PS4 based on certain comments.
And what do you want from Sony than?
Sony most probably will do nothing to actively stop enthusiast from trying to make a custom driver. The problem is how well it will work, as it is implied now that games themselves provide image in compatible to PSVR format, and thus you'll need some hacks to emulate it on PC for a game that natively does not support it (and it'll probably be different from formats Vive or OR use).
And hacks never works with 100% accuracy.
There's going to be separate versions of games for Oculus and Vive, sold on separate stores, that will have gone through different submission processes to be on the platform.
There won't be PC games that you launch and click "VR mode" and they miraculously work with every type of headset, and control setup, including PSVR.
There will be amateur projects on PC that might release games with just small patches for different VR headsets, but $20+ games will have VR specific versions with some publishers maybe selling multiple licenses for a single price.
Then if Sony make PSVR work on PC, it won't play Vive or Oculus games just amateur projects if the developers release a patch for it.
There's going to be separate versions of games for Oculus and Vive, sold on separate stores, that will have gone through different submission processes to be on the platform.
There won't be PC games that you launch and click "VR mode" and they miraculously work with every type of headset, and control setup, including PSVR.
There will be amateur projects on PC that might release games with just small patches for different VR headsets, but $20+ games will have VR specific versions with some publishers maybe selling multiple licenses for a single price.
Then if Sony make PSVR work on PC, it won't play Vive or Oculus games just amateur projects if the developers release a patch for it.
I think even if Oculus and HTC wants to, it will be technically impossible as the PS4 is a close system.
So far there doesn't seems to be any reason why Sony shouldn't make it compatible with the PC.
That's a back-end solution for developers, but Valve are going to have a marketplace for games and they aren't going to allow developers to put out games that aren't tailored to Vive's handsets, and the same for Oculus and Sony.
That's a back-end solution for developers, but Valve are going to have a marketplace for games and they aren't going to allow developers to put out games that aren't tailored to Vive's handsets, and the same for Oculus and Sony.
Valve allows pretty much anything, most games with VR support on Steam target Oculus SDK instead of OpenVR, and nothing suggests this will change and they will start imposing OpenVR support.
Also, developers will be able to use OpenVR outside Steam
Indeed, that's a very obvious negative effect of releasing PSVR on PC.
PC support means that Sony will have to look for profits directly from the PSVR HMD itself instead of from VR software. Thus needing to increase the price, thus limiting it's mainstream appeal and adoption rate, thus selling less PSVR HMDs and far more importantly less VR software.
People can think of a million bad reasons why Sony would have to support PCs, because they would very much like them to support PC. But they are far from being sound business decisions.
That's the whole bottomline here, releasing PSVR on PCs might be a positive to you, but from Sony's perspective it's a negative.
