The thought of playing a AAA first-party Sony title in VR is mouth-watering.
I was on board anyway, but holy shit, these rumors are too good to be true.
I was on board anyway, but holy shit, these rumors are too good to be true.
Tobii eye tracker is in that range, but the economics are very different for a third party accessory vs a first party expecting to sell 10 million headsets. It's a lot easier to recoup very extensive R & D costs with an extensive marketbase.
Gaze tracking was a big priority for Sony's Vice president of R&D, and he gave it as an example of a next gen VR feature a couple years ago.
FSR isn't anything crazy.
I hope it works out well. I was a late adopter on the PSVR1 and will probably do the same here. I'll be watching the launch of this with great interest.
The hardware sounds pretty great, as expected. This bit has me a little nervous though.
While some games this can work well (Tetris Effect) other games are near impossible to replicate the cool or engaging features of the gameplay (Iron Man VR, Half Life Alyx, Gorilla Tag, etc etc). I trust devs to come up with some great VR stuff, but I don't know about the "catch-all" approach.
While some games this can work well (Tetris Effect) other games are near impossible to replicate the cool or engaging features of the gameplay (Iron Man VR, Half Life Alyx, Gorilla Tag, etc etc). I trust devs to come up with some great VR stuff, but I don't know about the "catch-all" approach.
Different VR vendors have different opinions on the relative value of different features. The same goes for eyetracking for example - it's a topic of quite a lot of debate. Just because Facebook isn't doing something or doesn't see the cost-benefit in something doesn't mean Sony won't.
Anyway, as for the veracity of rumours in general, basically everything reported in this video on the hardware side has already been reported previously by UploadVR much earlier, aside from HDR. Maybe both reports are wrong, but we'll see.
Do you know what year this talk was from? I imagine it was one of his annual Connect talks so I could find it if I knew the year.
yeah, probably. I just like the game mechanics that come with games made for VR. Most non VR games ported to VR just means look around camera and point and aim with the controls, and you lose some of the fun vr mechanics. But maybe they will put more effort into it.
Given how small the VR market is? Absolutely. That would be leaving money on the table.
For whatever it's worth, I think Hitman 3 is a good example of how it can work. A third person stealth game that was converted into a full first person VR game with motion controls and physics stuff you'd expect from a VR game. In Hitman's case in particular what hurts it the most is being limited to the DualShock 4, but assuming that's no longer going to be an issue with PSVR2, I think it would've worked out amazingly.
still skeptical about eye tracking. For focusing on areas maybe they can reduce around it but surely they can't have it fast enough to have a really small spot at high detail? So some savings but not huge. May be more useful for gameplay knowing where you're looking.
All sounds good - nothing too fancy really although good to hopefully back up a 4k screen. sounds pretty on par with the index but without base stations if they get it right. Could be amazing.
All sounds good - nothing too fancy really although good to hopefully back up a 4k screen. sounds pretty on par with the index but without base stations if they get it right. Could be amazing.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
Unless they're losing money on each one, I can't see how it'll be cheaper. The only reason the Quest 2 is so cheap is because Oculus is subsidizing it to lock people into their ecosystem (and so they can harvest your sweet, sweet
110 FOV only? Isn't the current PSVR 96? Feel like that's not a big enough leap? FOV in the PSVR is one of my biggest gripes with the headset.
The original Vive is 110, and while it could be better, it's not as distracting as you might think. 120+ would obviously be better, but the wider you go, the more glass you have to shove into people's faces, and the larger the screen has to be.
At this point, I prefer lighter to better viewing angles tbh. Hopefully this thing is light, especially if it's tethered only with a wire.
That's cool. My favourite VR things have been what would be/actually are 'flat' games in VR. so RE7, WipEout, Skyrim, etc.
I'm super excited for this headset, but I agree with this. If we are in the chase of improving " Presence" .. for me this is the fundamental issue they need to address. Rather have the screen-door effect of the DK1 than a limited tunnel like FOV.
Still getting this day one..
It's probably the only way the ND or SSM could justify doing VR, we'd still get full VR games too, possibly even more if a lot of the big AAA have VR modes.
I don't think games designed to be played both on a flat.panel and on VR can be great on both formats.
I'm excited for the future, tho.
I'm excited for the future, tho.
People often forget that Sony has been researching VR for a long time before even PSVR became a thing. They're not new at this, so who knows what's possible?
What did he leak other than FF7 remake for PS+ and GoT Iki expansion? even his GoT leak wasn't entirely true since it wasn't standalone.
any ideas what "haptics" there are that improve helping motion sickness?
this is one of the key things for me
this is one of the key things for me
So then why is Carmack saying "maybe we should put haptics into a headset. Some people theorize it will help with simulator sickness" 11 months ago?
Using haptics to reduce motion sickness lines up with this patent published last year (translated from Japanese):
You might want to check the above patent filed in 2018 then.
Last edited:
If we are pointing out patents, then the "Flexible Resolution Scaling" function is described exactly in a patent filed by Mark Cerny in June last year:
Varying Effective Resolution By Screen Location By Altering Rasterization Parameters Patent Application
U.S. Patent Application 20200302574 for Varying Effective Resolution By Screen Location By Altering Rasterization Parameters
uspto.report
The title is confusing but it basically means that the screen resolution per a set area is determined by some set of parameters, or in this case, the parameters being derived from eye tracking the specific area that is viewed, this specific implementation is also described in claim 0107
I was trying to figure out what it could possibly be without involving eye tracking and couldn't come up with anything. So, now that we know that it does involve eye tracking... how does this differ from foveated rendering?
Varying resolution across the screen based on eye location is just one foveated rendering technique.
'Foveated rendering' is just an umbrella term for any rendering technique that makes use of your fovea's characteristics.
The reason Sony probably separated out and highlighted 'FSR', in this developer-orientated presentation, is that it's likely a standardised API thing for developers to use, something they get out of the box. While I guess they also expose raw eye tracking data to the application so it can do whatever additional application-specific foveated rendering it wants to do - e.g. a UE5 game using Nanite might dial down detail outside the fovea, a game using tessellation might tesselate according to gaze direction, a game like Dreams might render fewer splats outside the fovea etc. But all these things, including 'FSR', are foveated rendering techniques.
From what I can tell it is basically one Foveated Rendering technique but Sony gave a different definition for what Foveated Rendering is, which will use a different technique, where instead it is probably referring to something similar to VRS, where the shading qualtiy is determined per pixel region. Basically you can use both approaches in conjunction. So basically you can both reduce the resolution and lower the shading rate, or provide a mixutre of both at different levels depending on the distance from the eye view. Like for example, the area of your outer fovea could be using a lower resolution and full shading quality while further away the resolution is lowered further and the shading quality is lowered as well.
EDIT: gofreak's explanation is probably more accurate than mine.
The headset will be called the deja vu.
I'm not a big fan of just reliving the first generation either, not when you add all the various costs together.
That's a great point, I wasn't even thinking about Hitman. It seems cool, but like you said the controller and godawful tracking make it a bit hard to tell how good it really is.
Either way, I'm reserving judgement until I play stuff. I am all for support of VR by a company like Sony, especially when the only other super successful story is Facebook.
I hope this is true. I couldn't care less about "experiences", I want meaty stuff.
I also hope if this headset is good that it will work on PC.
God I can't fucking wait. Next gen doesn't start until PSVR2 says it does. I'm getting Vita level hype for this.
I think/hope RE7 gives Sony the confidence to make that their approach to VR. Move the investment from VR dedicated games into adding in well tuned VR modes for their big first party games. The indie games and VR only games will come from third parties.
You don't want the stench of PS2/Move camera technology anywhere near PS5.
Let it go. It was serviceable on PS4 but it needs to die asap. I think all PS gamers should appreciate PS5 has BC with PS4 VR using V1 hardware. That's as far as I'd take it too.
NGVR needs to use only PS5 tech going forward. Trust me, based on these specs, it will be worth it.
Let's face it, if you want to enjoy Astro Bot, Rescue Mission on PS5....you CAN do it with V1 hardware.
A potential Astro Bot Rescue Mission Remaster can only benefit from the new tech. Think about it. (I am betting Asobi/Sony is gonna make this their launch flag ship title either free or as a pack in title. Watch )
ultimately aren't most VR games just a display and a bunch of inputs? the headset is rotation and position in multiple axes, and the PSVR2 would be more accurate and stable vs PSVR1 so BC should be a much nicer experience. The controllers were either a DS4 which I assume Sony will incorporate enough sticks/buttons/triggers to emulate, especially if they're aiming for PS5flat/PSVR2 combo games.
PSVR 1 games were mostly sit-down/stationary affairs that all had to be playable just with a Dualshock 4 iirc. Also I believe they were mostly 180° experiences (due to camera limitations when turned away from camera), vs full 360° fully immersive experiences found on standalone headsets or PCVR.
sure but if PSVR2 is a superset of PSVR1 features then it can still play PSVR1 games.
There are lots of possibilities. What usually make people motion sick is the disconnect between what they are seeing and what their actual body is feeling,
For instance, a driving game where you crash into another car. The whole viewpoint shakes violently. But you are still sitting in your comfy chair and haven't moved an inch. Haptics could do some kind og light rumble in the headset simulating your body getting jolted. Obviously this would be mich lighter than the actual experience of crashing a car, but just that little bit of immersion is enough for your brain to fill in the blanks which would reduce the risk of motion sickness.
When you are using the chainsaw in doom and the rumble in the controller goes crazy, it feels nothing like a real chainsaw. But it adds to the illusion making it a much better experience than no rumble. This will be akin to that.
This may be true (depending on the controllers), but then Sony doesn't get as much money.
But also, I'm guessing a fair number of the PSVR1 experiences could be significantly improved if they were "remastered" with the new movement freedom and controllers in mind.