[HN Gopher] Playstation VR2
___________________________________________________________________
Playstation VR2
Author : mfiguiere
Score : 139 points
Date : 2022-11-02 14:16 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theverge.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theverge.com)
| downrightmike wrote:
| Maybe after this spends a few years flopping, they'll make a
| converter box for PSVR1
| macrolime wrote:
| Now if only I could get my hands on a PS5 that's not being sold
| for double price.
| ARandomerDude wrote:
| Honestly, I just want to know when I'll be able to walk into any
| big box store and buy a PS5 on a whim.
| bdw5204 wrote:
| The problem for PSVR2 is that the first one didn't really have
| any must-play games and the 2nd one's only game of note at launch
| is Horizon which is notorious for always releasing at the same
| time as some other action RPG that the mass market goes nuts for
| (Zelda and that Dark Souls game written by the Game of Thrones
| guy). It also doesn't help that there's no backward compatibility
| with PSVR1 games (that would allow devs to easily make cross-gen
| games and take advantage of the last gen VR install base), that
| the price is so high or that PS5s still aren't easy to buy. This
| feels like it could be another PSVR1 or PS Vita where Sony gets
| bored with it after it doesn't sell huge immediately and gives
| up.
|
| Even as somebody whose game of the year for this year is Horizon
| 2, I'm unsure about paying $600 for a Horizon spinoff coming out
| at the same time as the Harry Potter RPG. I expect it to be
| sitting on the shelf for MSRP at your local Walmart, Target,
| GameStop or Best Buy on launch day and basically every day
| afterwards. The fact that I'm unsure whether or not I'll even
| bother preordering it or just wait until I'm ready to play
| Horizon is not a good sign.
| vlunkr wrote:
| It's an odd coincidence that Horizon Call of the Mountain is
| the flagship game for PSVR2 and Horizon Worlds is the game Meta
| is pushing for Oculus. Probably not great for Sony.
| aceazzameen wrote:
| I would be excited for it if it worked on PCs too. Why can't we
| move the headset between the PS5 and PC? Do they not want to
| invest in making it work for PCs? That's lost hardware sales. Are
| they afraid Steam will eat into their own VR game sales? Outside
| of exclusives, maybe it will? But because it's only on PS5, I
| have no interest in owning a 2nd VR headset, which I'm sure will
| be a reaction from most PC gamers. So that's lost hardware and
| software sales too.
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| That is a surprisingly affordable price point for the technology
| on offer.
|
| Sony must have really efficient manufacturing, assuming they're
| not selling at a loss.
|
| A quality 120Hz 4000 x 2040 HDR OLED display alone would likely
| cost at least half the MSRP.
| bitcurious wrote:
| Sony has a history of selling hardware at a loss at launch and
| then recouping via subs/software/late-cycle sales.
| bananaoomarang wrote:
| Not sure why this is being downvoted... perhaps it is
| documented somewhere they are not selling this at a loss but
| ordinarily both Sony and Microsoft sell consoles at a loss
| indeed.
|
| I think ordinarily peripherals are not sold at a loss, but it
| would make sense that a pricy VR headset would be the
| exception.
| smoldesu wrote:
| It's a hard sell. There are cheaper 120hz headsets on the
| market, and the experience of tethering yourself to another
| machine is pretty antiquated in 2022. Unless someone's
| _only_ option for VR gaming is through their PS5, they 'd
| probably be better-suited with anything else.
| jklinger410 wrote:
| Where is this 120hz headset that doesn't pair to another
| system for a comparable price?
|
| The META quest is MSRP $1,499 and Zuck says they are
| shipping THAT at a loss.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| You might not know this but the Meta/Oculus Quest 2
| (120Hz) has existed since 2020. I got my Quest 2, 2 years
| ago, when it was still labeled Oculus on the box, for 350
| Euros. I think now it's 450 Euros, inflation and all, but
| at least the storage is double at 128GB.
|
| Great device, saved my sanity during the winter
| lockdowns.
| jklinger410 wrote:
| Ok right, but the current Oculus model is $1500.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| There is no "current" Oculus, as the newer "Quest Pro"
| does not replace the older "Quest 2" but both are
| available being sold in parallel at different price
| brackets, like iPhone 14 Pro Max and iPhone SE.
|
| And the Quest 2 alone is superior to the PSVR since it
| has the "gaming console" built in, while being far
| cheaper than the PSVR whiteout even accounting for the
| extra cost of the PS5 in the equation.
|
| Pricing aside, Meta had a decent product with the Quest
| 2, as they went all-in and it was designed form the start
| as a stand alone cordless platform and focused and
| polished the entre VR gaming experience around that from
| the ground up even buying dedicated VR game dev studios,
| while for Sony, the PSVR is just a corded accessory to
| the stationary PS5, but not the main product and so it's
| not their main focus for PS5 gaming, and we'll see this
| reflected in the amount and quality of VR titles they'll
| put out.
|
| The PSVR does win in the graphics department thanks to
| the processing power of the PS5 but that comes at the
| cost of reduce mobility thanks to the stupid cable
| keeping your head tied to the PS5 and ruining your
| immersion. In fact, I'm calling it right now: the cable
| tether will make it a fail for most users. I expect the
| return rates to be high followed by low retail sales and
| people dumping them on ebay after a few months of
| gathering dust, same like with the last PSVR they made.
| It will flop as hard as the Quest Pro.
|
| For people wanting to dip their toes in VR and play Beat
| Sabre and Pistol Whip, 450 Euros is far easier to stomach
| than invest 1300+ Euros in a PlayStation VR setup and
| then hate it because you'll always have to take care of
| not tangling yourself or tripping on the cable. We saw
| the same with Valve's VR gear. People just didn't want to
| put up with the hassle of having an expensive and corded
| setup just to play Half-Life Alyx.
|
| Meta/Oculus moved the goalposts so far with their
| cordless self-contained devices, that any new VR gear
| still needing cables and a separate PC/console to
| function is an instant fail. I expect Apple's VR gear
| will also be cordless, powered by their excellent mobile
| Mx chips.
| willis936 wrote:
| This was my first thought too. It's an amazing looking piece of
| kit. I will not be buying a Playstation, but I do wish the PC
| VR space had someone continuing to push forward. The Index is
| nice but they really missed a beat by going with LCD. I haven't
| used my CV1 recently but I'm under the impression I will need a
| meta login, which I'm not interested in doing.
| rjh29 wrote:
| The Oculus Quest 2 with Air Link kills most other headsets
| dead, being both cheap, high-resolution and wireless.
| nsxwolf wrote:
| I find Air Link to be finicky enough that I hardly ever use
| it. Once it's actually working it's pretty great, but the
| dance I have to do to enable the feature on the headset,
| enable the feature in Oculus Home (the settings don't
| persist forever for some reason), then get Steam VR to be
| happy with it... it's a lot of clicks (both in the real
| world on mouse/keyboard, then in the headset with the
| controllers, and back out and in again when something isn't
| working), often requires rebooting the PC or Quest or both,
| and is just a UX disaster overall.
| jesuscript wrote:
| https://rarest.org/tech/most-expensive-vr-headsets
|
| From that list, the HP Reverb has been described as better
| than the Index and Quest 2 due to higher quality screen and
| FOV (priced well too).
|
| The Primax and Aero are considered to be even more high end.
|
| I am considering making the investment since VR and
| Space/Flight/Racing sims are an entirely unique experience
| with VR and all the joysticks/racing wheels.
| telman17 wrote:
| Tried the Reverb and was plagued by basic USB issues that
| stemmed from having an Asus motherboard. Went through many
| guides and troubleshooting before saying screw it, and
| returned it for an Index instead.
|
| (I use VR in Elite Dangerous and Flight Simulator)
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| The controller quality and tracking on the HP is worse than
| Index or Quest 2 which is (rightfully) a big deal for some
| people. The HP is the perfect VR headset for simracing and
| flightsim though.
|
| Be careful with simracing though! I started with one of the
| $300 Logitech setups and am now a few thousand dollars deep
| into a direct-drive setup. ;)
| jesuscript wrote:
| Yes, same here. I have just started.
| mellosouls wrote:
| _HP Reverb has been described as better than the Index and
| Quest 2_
|
| Unlikely - unless strictly on hardware specs - the Quest 2
| is almost universally regarded (Google will confirm) as the
| best current headset, simply on bang for buck.
| qu4z-2 wrote:
| This conversation doesn't seem to be about bang-for-buck.
| There's also a difference between strict (on-paper)
| hardware specs and the actual experience of using it.
| rcarr wrote:
| Give it a couple of years and I think you'll have Valve
| release a Steam Deck with official support for their headset
| for some kind of super portable VR set up. You can already do
| it with the current gen (even wirelessly) but it's not quite
| ready for prime time. Have a look at this video to see it in
| action:
|
| https://youtu.be/5FWDSFVp3NM
| chaostheory wrote:
| Affordability is one of the major issues of the metaverse.
| Most people can't afford a VR ready PC as is and you're
| lamenting that the Index doesn't use more expensive
| components. I feel that Valve made the right choice with
| cheaper components since their goal is increased adoption of
| XR.
| willis936 wrote:
| Yet the PSVR2 is superior to the Index and costs half as
| much. Something is driving that it'd be nice if that
| something was able to propagate to PC VR.
| chaostheory wrote:
| PSVR2 is better than the Index in several ways, but PSVR2
| came out 4 years after the Index. 4-5 years is now the
| new console refresh cycle duration. PSVR2 is also part of
| a completely closed platform. PCVR is a much more open
| platform which tends to mean higher prices. Let's also
| not forget that the Index uses base stations for
| tracking, which is much more accurate (and also more
| expensive) than inside out tracking.
| jklinger410 wrote:
| Stating the obvious but the total cost has to include the PS5,
| no? To compare it to the META headset at least.
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| Yes-ish. The mobile hardware in the meta headsets limits the
| games available on it. If you want to play No Man's Sky VR
| you're going to need to use Oculus Link (is it called Meta
| Link now?) and a beefy PC.
|
| If you just want a beat saber device the Quest 2 is
| definitely way cheaper overall.
| joshstrange wrote:
| > "PSVR games are not compatible with PSVR2, because PSVR2 is
| designed to deliver a truly next-gen VR experience," explained
| Hideaki Nishino, a vice president of platform experience at Sony,
| in September.
|
| That's just absurd. I don't have any PS equipment but I had
| mulled over the idea of getting a PS5 and PSVR since I enjoy my
| Quest 2 and would like better graphics/processing power but I
| don't want to build a gaming PC for PCVR. Not supporting older
| games feels very gross.
| [deleted]
| jesuscript wrote:
| What games are worth playing in VR on the ps5?
| ErneX wrote:
| Some of the ones I'm interested in so far:
|
| Horizon: Call of the Mountain, Firewall Ultra, Resident Evil:
| Village.
|
| I'd love if they add VR support to Gran Turismo 7 but they
| haven't announced anything related to this one.
| andrewstuart wrote:
| I bought the first PSVR.
|
| I wanted to love VR but it made me so sick that I literally get
| nauseous when I even think about using it.
|
| All my interest in VR finished at that point which is a real pity
| cause it felt exciting initially.
|
| Anyone want to buy a PSVR? Used for about 2 hours total.
| mdmglr wrote:
| Same experience. Bought the PSVR at launch and it gave me a
| headache. Ended up selling it for 50% of what I paid. Not going
| to buy PSVR2. Maybe two or three more generations down the line
| I will reconsider.
| mnd999 wrote:
| Does it have vomit on it?
| andrewstuart wrote:
| Minimal. A little eucalyptus oil and a cloth should freshen
| it up.
| tuvan wrote:
| After experiencing how good Oculus Link works over Wi-Fi LAN, I
| won't purchase any wired VR headset no matter the quality. Wi-Fi
| is fast enough to stream high quality video to any of these
| headsets but for some reason it is still not embraced in the
| circle.
| FieryTransition wrote:
| Too much variability in the home networks that people have are
| likely one of the reasons
| dymk wrote:
| Not backwards compatible with PSVR version 1 games? I'm having a
| hard time imagining a good reason for this. They claim it's
| because it's a totally new VR experience... whatever that means.
| slipheen wrote:
| The controller is pretty different, and I don't think the
| original PSVR games were written with an abstraction for that
| like Steam games are.
| dymk wrote:
| VR PC games manage to run on Quest, Vive, you name it - the
| controllers being different isn't a very compelling argument
| why they've not given any backwards compatibility support.
|
| As for the software abstraction being poor, that's also just
| bad engineering on Sony's part then.
| mortenjorck wrote:
| There's so much great (and under-appreciated) content for PSVR,
| I really hope Sony has some kind of upgrade path tooling for
| developers to "remaster" existing titles for PSVR 2.
| BashiBazouk wrote:
| I would guess it's because psvr1 depended on an external camera
| for tracking from both the headset and controllers. The new
| headset has internal cameras and a completely new control
| system. I would expect it will be each developer that has to
| make their old game psvr2 compatible.
| tuvan wrote:
| Surely the games used a high level API that Sony could
| support with this. I doubt games had any code related to
| external camera tracking, the system must've just spit out
| the position of the headset to the game.
| NDizzle wrote:
| Yeah, I'm a little bummed about this. Maybe it's a combination
| of the controllers and the increase in resolution/etc. With the
| gen 1, you had the move controllers and a remote camera. Games
| were probably developed with that in mind - even if they knew
| some changes were coming down the pipe, it would be difficult
| to write the games with the VR2 system in mind.
|
| Whether or not this is all abstracted away, I have no idea...
| but there really is a pretty huge difference between 1 and 2 if
| you think about the camera set up and the controller situation.
| The move controllers were optional - they didn't even come with
| the system. I think there were bundles that had them. They came
| out BEFORE the VR system did, and were kind of a gimmick until
| the PSVR landed.
|
| Now that you have a real high quality headset, that ships with
| standard, hopefully high quality controllers, the target
| application should take advantage of those things.
| kahrl wrote:
| Their claim is complete horseshit. They must have decided that
| including the previous game library was not worth the
| development effort of an API translation layer. Hope they're
| right...
| ErneX wrote:
| Some games presented the Dual Shock 4 controller visually
| tracked in game, even if they managed to do a compatibility
| layer those games still relied on tracking the DS4 controller
| light via the camera.
|
| But at least some devs have confirmed their psvr games will
| be patched to support the new version, like No Man's Sky.
| NDizzle wrote:
| Unfortunately not everyone is like the folks who work on No
| Man's Sky. They have released a boatload of fixes, new
| content, engine updates, VR support, you name it, they keep
| delivering.
|
| Their support of that game has been very impressive over
| the years. Launch was rocky, sure, but they recovered and
| kept pushing ahead.
| nortiest wrote:
| It's not complete horseshit. The old controllers have more
| buttons on them and the new controllers have thumbsticks, so
| the controls for PSVR games won't map to PSVR2 hardware.
| [deleted]
| sp332 wrote:
| If you have a PSVR, you probably have the old controllers
| too.
| bayofpigs wrote:
| skhameneh wrote:
| As a Vive owner, this is the first headset to really catch my
| interest since!
|
| 120hz and OLED are exactly what I've been looking for in a "next
| gen" headset. The inside-out tracking does give me some
| hesitation, but overall it's sounding like this will be an
| excellent piece of hardware. The biggest downside (and upside for
| general consumers, just plug and play) would be platform support
| limited to Playstation... Which I'm eager to see if community
| efforts try to bring PC support given the excellent hardware
| specs/price.
| jayd16 wrote:
| Inside out tracking is great these days. Unless you mean you're
| worried about Sony's implementation specifically?
| skhameneh wrote:
| My worries aren't specific to Sony's implementation, it's
| specifically related to the processing latency that's been
| associated with inside-out tracking. My understanding is
| inside out typically uses CMOS sensors which generally have
| inherent latency returning an image that must be processed
| quickly. Outside-in generally uses photo-diodes with lighter
| processing.
|
| I have yet to try modern headsets to see for myself, but my
| hunch is there's some level of latency that isn't present
| with outside-in. It's also worth noting some individuals may
| have varied perceptions of latency while their pyshical
| response of fatigue/etc may be more present than their actual
| awareness. Anecdotally, I once got in an argument with a
| professor that I could visibly notice when CRT monitors were
| set to 50hz (instead of 60hz) and would get headaches. Now
| it's generally accepted many can discern between much higher
| refresh rates than that FWIW.
| dagmx wrote:
| Inside out SLAM isn't solely dependent on optics. It also
| uses IMUs to fill in the interim.
|
| You can quite easily test this on any phone that supports
| AR (I'd recommend an iPhone).
|
| You get tracking even if you occlude the camera for a
| couple frames.
| gowings97 wrote:
| Does PS5 have enough power to really do 4k120 with ray tracing?
| skhameneh wrote:
| Yes and no. I believe it's called foveated rendering where
| eye tracking is used for adaptive rendering, which allows for
| high performance without any perception of degradation.
| namelessoracle wrote:
| Not really unless they have some programming magic. Some of
| the stuff the console devs squeeze out is pretty magical
| sometimes.
| evo_9 wrote:
| As a Vive VR owner going on ~6 years with that setup, yeah I
| don't know why anyone would spend as much as a PS5 for a VR
| headset. I really like some aspects of VR gaming, but overall,
| for me at least, it's pretty clear it's a very niche device.
|
| There are a few genres that translate reasonable well to VR but
| most of the big categories do not. Things like sports game
| (Madden, NBA 22/23, NHL 22/23,etc), likely impossible to adapt to
| VR. Platformers, ditto. Strategy games, why? MMO's? Maybe, but
| probably not either.
|
| The fast majority of actual, good / fun / successful games in VR
| are of a few very specific types. Wave shooters (Space Pirate
| Trainer, Blasters of the Universes -- both excellent btw), and
| _some_ FPS (ideal created specifically for VR - aka Half Life:
| Alyx is the gold standard). There are very few entirely new play
| experiences / game mechanics in VR to date; aka Beat Saber,
| Pistol Whip and... that's all I can think of. Both are great
| workout games btw. The only other great VR title that I play /
| played a ton is In Death, and that's a bit of a unique bow
| shooter, which I guess is another VR genre (bow games). Great
| game, probably the best of that type.
|
| Speaking of which, I do like the physical nature of VR and for
| me, I tend to use it as a post-workout way to get in some extra
| cardio with a nice amount of hand-eye/tracking mixed in. Games
| like Beat Saber and Space Pirate Trainer, when played non-stop
| for let's say 30 minutes or so, yeah you actually burn
| significant calories.
|
| Outside of that you have the sim category and that could be work
| if you are super into racing games, flight sims, and that sort of
| thing. I've played with a few race games in VR, mostly it works
| ok, but not quite as well as I'd of thought (but maybe I need to
| invest in a proper FF wheel, a gamepad kinda ruins it).
|
| I enjoy VR gaming but I think it's going to remain a niche until
| we get to some crazy, super advanced state where we can by pass
| our eyes and 'beam' info right into the brain (however the hell
| that would work); aka achieving a sort of ST Holodeck level type
| thing. Or maybe Nintendo in a few generation will embrace VR and
| then we get some truly unique / new game mechanics. I don't know
| what else is going to break open this genre, but right now it
| doesn't feel like it's moving forward at all where it matters
| most - the software.
| skhameneh wrote:
| Vive owner here too.
|
| I understand the sentiment, the price does push this into what
| I'd call "prosumer" category. But... PSVR2 is the first headset
| to really catch my interest. The Valve Index sounded nice, but
| I was disappointed in the lack of OLED especially given the
| Index's price. The PSVR2 is what I've been looking for in new
| hardware and I think it's a step in the right direction.
| thesausageking wrote:
| I have an Oculus and love it. Blaston, thrill of the fight,
| superhot, .. The only thing I don't like is it's owned by
| Meta/FB. I don't have/don't want a Facebook account and don't
| want to commit to the Meta/Oculus ecosystem.
|
| I already have a ps5, plan to get this headset, and could see
| it really taking off.
| CobaltFire wrote:
| Assetto Corsa in VR is absolutely immersive with a proper
| driving rig, to the point that even without motion I brace
| myself.
|
| DCS and MS Flight Sim are similarly immersive if you have a
| proper cockpit.
|
| Controllers really break the immersion.
| majormajor wrote:
| Sports games seem like an immediately obvious one to make work
| in VR, but it would be a very different model than the "top
| down, control active player, see whole court at once" thing.
| Think "actually playing" or "fitness game" more than today's
| sports games.
|
| You're gonna need plenty of space to turn around in, though,
| which could be a big challenge for most people. Spinning your
| player around with just a controller seems like the sort of
| thing that would be likely to introduce motion sickness.
| Karliss wrote:
| I wouldn't consider Beat Saber an entirely new game mechanics.
| It seems like pretty standard rhythm game format with
| notes/beat coming towards you and requiring to activate
| corresponding input at the right time. Rhythm games have the
| history of having all kind unique and diverse input
| methods.Some of them quite physically demanding like Dance
| Dance Revolution style ones where you have to step on the dance
| pad.
| msoad wrote:
| Do I need a PlayStation 5 to use this?
| thefreeman wrote:
| yes
| shock-value wrote:
| It's unclear if there will be a solution (possibly not
| supported by Sony) to use it as a display for PC.
| gpmcadam wrote:
| > PlayStation VR2 is only compatible with a PS5 or PS5 Digital
| Edition console
| JohnJamesRambo wrote:
| I don't know anything about VR, can someone tell me how this
| compares to the Meta Advertisement Torture Device (MATD) that
| costs $1500?
| threeseed wrote:
| Meta Quest 2 which is what this competes with is $400 USD.
|
| Pro version is for businesses.
| JohnJamesRambo wrote:
| How does it compare to the Quest 2?
| washadjeffmad wrote:
| What I'll say about the Quest 2 is if it had been marketed
| as a portable wired or wireless PC headset that can do
| standalone VR, I wouldn't have thought so poorly of its
| pre-Meta experience.
|
| Now that the Facebook component has been gutted from it, I
| can log in again, so I've actually been using it.
|
| My biggest complaints are that it wasn't designed for Asian
| facial features (I guess I could wear a prosthetic nose),
| and none of the three IPD settings are sufficient for me or
| my SO. Other models have a continuous slider for the
| lenses, but the Quest 2 has only a few discrete positions,
| and they don't work "in between".
| germinalphrase wrote:
| The IPD _really_ should be adjusted with a rotating wheel
| while wearing.
| dymk wrote:
| I don't think anybody knows, because there aren't any
| reviews of the PSVR2 yet, but generally reviews of the
| Quest 2 are that it's a high quality device at a very good
| price point
| MikusR wrote:
| PSVR2 needs additional 500-1000 USD device. Quest 2 is
| standalone.
| rubyist5eva wrote:
| A friend of mine gave me a PSVR1 for my birthday (which I use on
| my PS5). I'm playing Resident Evil 7 in VR mode and it's the most
| immersive experience in any horror (or possibly any other genre,
| really) game I've ever played. I was legitimately terrified and
| didn't want to sleep the night I played it for the first time. I
| am not a person that gets easily scared in horror films or games
| and usually get a laugh out of the absurdity of gore and jump
| scares but RE7 just hit much different in VR. The dinner table
| scene at the beginning of the game, and the chase sequences were
| absolutely horrifying.
|
| If Resident Evil 8 and/or the Resident Evil 4 remakes get VR
| modes I will buy PSVR2 on day one.
| imiric wrote:
| I was a fan of the original Resident Evil on the PS1, and some
| of the earlier survival horror games like Silent Hill. I felt
| that Silent Hill in particular crossed the line into
| unenjoyable territory for me. The game was superb, but the
| horror was just too unsettling to keep playing. I would get
| physically ill, with stomach cramps, nightmares, etc., that it
| took years of forcing myself to actually finish it. Same with
| SH2 a few years later. Then the RE series took a more action
| oriented turn, and I lost interest.
|
| Until RE7, which I started playing without VR. I can agree that
| it's truly horrifying, and a return to their roots. The first-
| person perspective also adds a lot to the immersion. As much as
| I'm curious, I couldn't imagine playing it in VR.
|
| If you're looking for a different kind of horror, give
| Subnautica a try. It's terrifying even without VR. I've played
| for many hours and still can't get myself to finish it.
|
| Part of me thinks it's a bit silly to intentionally subject
| yourself to the stress that these games produce, and as I get
| older, I seek more enjoyable experiences. Yet for some reason,
| I keep going back to them...
| rubyist5eva wrote:
| I have Subnautica on PC and love it, you're right it is very
| scary because of the way the world is setup and the type of
| threats you face. I recently moved and my HTC Vive is packed
| up and haven't had the motivation to hook up the sensors
| again, so I may hook it up to go back and try the VR mode now
| that you mention it.
| oneoff786 wrote:
| It helps that resident evil 7 is just a good game. The first
| half at least. It made some very smart decisions to approach
| horror differently.
|
| I'm not convinced the vr adds much. I heard you aim guns with
| your head, not your hands and found that stupid.
|
| The resident evil team has been exploring a lot of interesting
| stuff with their titles. 8 is sort of a celebration of all of
| it with sections of the game that are clearly designed around
| the mentality of 4, 7, and 2 each
| redredhathat wrote:
| Great news - Resident Evil 8 will be released have an official
| PSVR2 version. Full remake and PSVR2 integration.
|
| There are trailers/previews available and it looks pretty darn
| impressive.
| rubyist5eva wrote:
| Well then I'm sold. Gonna look into it, thanks!
| adam_arthur wrote:
| It's pretty clear that games are the entry point into wide
| household adoption of VR.
|
| The metaverse as is currently being pursued by many is nothing
| more than an VR mmo.
|
| We should be calling these things games rather than applying an
| incorrect label or overhyping what they are. Until utility
| reaches a point which proves otherwise.
|
| Sony/Microsoft are best positioned to capitalize
| intrasight wrote:
| > entry point into wide household adoption of VR
|
| The "gateway drug" is how I put it.
|
| What do you mean by "incorrect label"? The "metaverse" label is
| aspirational for sure at this point - but I don't think anyone
| would disagree that it's what we are striving towards. So let's
| keep that label and move towards it.
| hbn wrote:
| > The "gateway drug" is how I put it.
|
| Now I'm thinking of that TNG episode where everyone on the
| Enterprise gets addicted to the glasses headset game where
| you get the discs in the wormholes
| adam_arthur wrote:
| VR is just a new display medium. Metaverse to me implies some
| common spec with interoperative worlds, or statefulness that
| persists... not simply a one off VR game
|
| Using the current definition, "Second Life" in VR is also the
| metaverse
| onion2k wrote:
| _It's pretty clear that games are the entry point into wide
| household adoption of VR._
|
| Ironically that's also the thing that will stop them getting
| widespread support though. They'll always be seen as expensive
| toys while gaming is the driving force behind adoption.
|
| What's _really_ needed is support from the television and movie
| industry (immersive programming), music (streaming VR gigs),
| and collaborative remote socializing (something like
| Metaverse). The problem with that those is cost - if you want
| to enjoy a VR gig or a remote social occasion with your family
| you need to spend _thousands of dollars_ on equipment.
|
| VR might be mainstream in the same sense that a Playstation is,
| but it'd take a _huge_ shift in thinking for it to ever be
| mainstream like television is.
| intrasight wrote:
| > huge shift in thinking
|
| There are plenty of visionaries besides Zuckerberg who have
| made that shift. Some company or consortium will succeed in
| creating the Metaverse, and then we'll all be gathering
| there.
| chaostheory wrote:
| I'm hoping with the PSVR2 launch that people will finally realize
| that the metaverse consists of way more than just meta and
| Horizon. The current complaints on how the metaverse sucks are
| like if people only visited Yahoo's homepage and decided that it
| was the entire internet and that the entire internet was
| terrible. It's a ridiculous way to evaluate an entire ecosystem,
| but in their defense at least they took 5 minutes to actually try
| it compared to nearly everyone else making terrible assumptions
| on the metaverse based on 0 experience.
|
| If Sony fails to bridge VR/AR to the masses, then it's all up to
| Apple to save the industry. Meta built an amazing, affordable
| product, but their brand is just so toxic that it'll take a
| generational change before it can eventually recover its good
| will and people in developed countries trust it again. Google has
| a similar brand goodwill problem where they will also be unable
| sustain any new metaverse related product introductions. Their
| brand image has just been really damaged by their own internal
| promotion system
| dfxm12 wrote:
| _Meta built an amazing, affordable product, but their brand is
| just so toxic that it'll take a generational change before it
| can eventually recover its good will and people in developed
| countries trust it again._
|
| It's not their brand _per se_ that 's the issue, but the fact
| that their headsets were bricks unless you had signed up for a
| Facebook account with all the issues that come with that, from
| privacy concerns to getting locked out seemingly on a whim:
| https://www.reddit.com/r/OculusQuest/comments/j22lmx/im_out_...
|
| The response from Meta still leaves a lot to be desired:
| https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2022/07/quest-vr-has-traded-f...
|
| Less important than Meta rehabbing their brand image would be
| them actually putting a stop to their user hostile behavior.
| onethought wrote:
| This isn't true. You've always been able to use a headset
| with an oculus account. More recently you had to switch to a
| Meta account. Neither of those are Facebook accounts.
|
| Source: never had Facebook, but have had Quests
| zizee wrote:
| I also never had to connect my (rift) headset to a Facebook
| account, but wasn't there a period when new quests needed
| to be connected to Facebook accounts?
| iwillbenice wrote:
| vvillena wrote:
| If you didn't have a previously-existing Oculus account,
| there was a period in which you were forced to use your
| Facebook account. I think this was since the release of
| Quest 2, up until a few months ago.
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| I think you forgot Valve although they don't seem to follow
| through with their hardware.
| RajT88 wrote:
| The WMR headsets are all pretty good, but the ecosystem
| suffers from the typical MSFT, "Oh yeah, we should build one
| of those too!" dynamic. Pretty good hardware, but a variety
| of factors which just end up failing to attract people to the
| platform in the long term.
|
| See: Zune.
| chaostheory wrote:
| WMR is slowly being abandoned by MS. The G2 was a decent
| attempt, but HP is pulling out too
| chaostheory wrote:
| That's why I didn't mention them. They're like Rolls Royce
| where they build expensive toys for people with discretionary
| cash. Most normal people outside of Silicon Valley do not
| have the resources to justify spending about $3,000 on a
| complete PCVR setup
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| I have the disposable income I cant justify it because I
| can't multitask and also I have to also pay for glasses
| inserts. I want to play a space based VR game but I don't
| see one out. I have a stand-alone headset (a oculus quest
| 2) and I don't even play it.
| phyrex wrote:
| Tbf the quest pro does exactly that. You can wear it with
| glasses and it's designed to let you multitask
| wingmanjd wrote:
| Elite Dangerous and No Man's Sky are both space-based PC
| VR games, if you're still looking around for one. Your
| quest 2 might be able to stream them from a PC.
|
| My eyesight is _just_ able to play without glasses
| inserts, so I marginally feel your pain. I wish I could
| use my glasses. Maybe it's time I pulled out contacts
| again.
| chaostheory wrote:
| You don't need glass inserts for the Meta Pro, and some
| other headsets. With PCVR, it is totally possible to
| multitask. You just have to both able and willing to pay
| for better systems.
| volkk wrote:
| > I'm hoping with the PSVR2 launch that people will finally
| realize that the metaverse consists of way more than just meta
| and Horizon.
|
| agreed. it's unfortunate that FB decided to just coin
| "Metaverse" since it's all encompassing. to your later point,
| it's as if Yahoo decided to launch a product called "Internet"
| and have it be an awful piece of software turning off everyone
| from the concept of the internet and pushing it back another
| decade simply due to terrible branding
| dreadlordbone wrote:
| They didn't coin "metaverse" it comes from Snowcrash and was
| later evangelized by Mathew Ball.
| volkk wrote:
| sure, to us nerds that's obvious. but not to my fiance, or
| to my mom. metaverse = FB
| gardenhedge wrote:
| my parents definitely don't think metaverse = FB
| fknorangesite wrote:
| True, but outside of HN-bubbles, where do you think most
| people first heard the term?
| chaostheory wrote:
| Yes, this what drives me crazy. I don't understand how so
| many smart and educated people fell for meta's ad and
| marketing campaign. I guess the campaign was just so amazing
| for that many people to be mislead. Someone should rename
| their company into Internet and maybe enough people will
| believe that this new company is the sole owner and developer
| of the Internet
| Firmwarrior wrote:
| Haha, the 3d TV industry deserves some marketing hate too,
| and Google for their godawful crap cardboard platform.
|
| I'll bet that once someone puts out a super polished
| platform with a handful of killer apps, it'll take off
| anyway. Right now even if you gave away preconfigured VR
| headsets to everyone for free they wouldn't use them
| chaostheory wrote:
| I strongly feel that meta already did create that super
| polished platform with Beat Saber as the first killer
| app. Not enough people are even willing to give it a try
| due to a combination of FB's broken brand and the
| intimidating giant box that you have to put on your face.
| Hopefully, the new smaller form factors will help with
| the last problem
| linuxftw wrote:
| Or, you know, we played guitar hero and there's no need
| to relive the past with a screen 3 inches from your
| eyeballs?
| chaostheory wrote:
| You haven't tried modern VR yet have you? Google
| Cardboard doesn't count.
| three_seagrass wrote:
| It's not so much "falling for it" as it is jumping on the
| bandwagon.
|
| The hype is real, and mirthless smart people are just
| looking to cash in on Meta's billion dollar branding moves.
| chaostheory wrote:
| > It's not so much "falling for it" as it is jumping on
| the bandwagon.
|
| I don't see much of a difference between the two. I can
| understand the non-techie masses doing this, but not what
| seems like the majority of HN users.
| tacker2000 wrote:
| You miss the point that video games are not a top priority for
| meta, they are betting on work and casual users that will hang
| out all day long in their metaverse VR world with their goggles
| on, much like people use their phones nowadays, and then
| consume their ads.
|
| If Zuck was smart, he could have a partnership with Sony and
| push out a launch title for this.
| chaostheory wrote:
| > You miss the point that video games are not a top priority
| for meta
|
| If that were true, the work features would have shipped
| already, but they were busy with gaming which is why they
| bought several game studios. Games were a major focus for
| meta because it's one of the traditional vectors for new
| technology adoption. Well, that and pornography.
|
| Let's hope that you're right now assuming meta is changing
| course, and I'm wrong because I've been waiting to use the
| work features. So far, the 3rd party options and the
| resolution for reading text still isn't good enough
| zizee wrote:
| The recent launch of the Quest Pro was clearly focussing on
| use cases other than games, and the pro's resolution and
| pancake lenses appear to be now reached "good enough" to
| work with/read text in.
| chaostheory wrote:
| That's true, but a common reviewer complaint is that the
| work applications still aren't there yet. There are a few
| design VR apps, but most of the big productivity apps on
| the Meta store are just bookmarks to web apps. This
| changes when MS and Office arrive on the Quest.
| intrasight wrote:
| Gaming is just the gateway drug to the Metaverse. And they
| probably bought the studios mainly for talent.
| tjpnz wrote:
| I don't care about the metaverse. Just let me have fun playing
| some video games in VR.
| chaostheory wrote:
| Multiplayer VR games are part of the metaverse... the
| metaverse is just XR with a network connection over the
| internet. That's all it is which one reason I don't
| understand all the hate for such a neutral medium from fellow
| techies
| SV_BubbleTime wrote:
| I'll do you one better...
|
| It's been almost 3 years since Half Life Alyx and nothing in
| the Vr space has come even remotely close.
|
| It's the killer app problem. There are a few very cool
| experiences in VR, but overall it a sad environment.
|
| I have no doubt it'll be big. Just curious on HOW SLOWLY it's
| going.
| jayd16 wrote:
| I think we agree, but terminology wise its not a killer app
| problem. Its an install base problem. (which is a chicken
| and egg problem) If the install base was there, big studios
| would invest the time.
| germinalphrase wrote:
| My take is simply that the resolution is too low relative
| to average users expectations (set by their tv and
| smartphone).
|
| _Every single person_ with whom I have shared my Quest 2
| has said something to the effect of "is it supposed to be
| so blurry?" and "this thing is uncomfortable".
|
| The tech is really cool - and the experiences are not
| totally there (as you say) - but it's not developed enough
| as a product.
| insanitybit wrote:
| I don't think it's a killer app problem so much as a
| general UX issue. I really love RE4, I've played it 100x on
| the GC and Wii, I could play it in my sleep.
|
| I got it on VR and it was awesome. It was so much more
| intense and fucking cool and extra flexible (I can hold a
| knife and a shotgun at the same time???? fucking amazing).
|
| The main thing is that I don't want to _just_ play video
| games. I like to jump around a bit and do other things.
| Switching apps is just really annoying in VR, usually it 's
| not even possible.
|
| Probably a better example is Netflix. I usually have TV
| shows on throughout the day, pausing them constantly for
| seconds, minutes, or hours, as I do something else, or
| often letting them play in the background. Can't do that on
| my Quest 2, it's either "sit in front of a TV and do
| nothing else" or don't.
|
| To me, these issues are really more OS level/ platform
| level. The _VR UX_ is out of whack with how I want to use
| it. Individually though, I can say that my experience is
| that a VR version of something can be way cooler.
|
| Also, I'd like to have a keyboard interface. If I could
| wear something like fingerless gloves + have a keyboard
| hooked up and I just sit at my desk with N virtual monitors
| that would be amazing. But again, that's not really an
| "app" problem, it's the OS/platform/UX.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Wanting to multitask VR and non-VR workloads is......
| unusual. You may be extremely niche here.
| dpkirchner wrote:
| I think I'd like that. Having some way to pop up an
| overlay that I can interact with (reply to a chat
| message, check a YT video, etc) while the game remains in
| the primary display. Sort of an AR in VR.
| insanitybit wrote:
| I don't know anyone who sits down to just do one thing,
| everyone hops between apps.
| rjh29 wrote:
| Apple is the worst thing that could happen to VR.
|
| Facebook may be 'toxic' but the Meta is cheap, amazing,
| supports Air Link for PC, even has cross-play (buy a Quest
| game, play it on PC at better graphics). Privacy options, they
| -removed- Facebook login, you can sideload apps. Tacit support
| for modding games like Beat Saber.
|
| Apple would turn their headset into a walled garden with no
| ability to run custom apps and definitely no Air Link. Try to
| mod a game and get banned.
| SV_BubbleTime wrote:
| > they -removed- Facebook login
|
| They called it something else, they make you use different
| credentials, but it's all Facebook on the backend.
| georgeecollins wrote:
| I am no expert but it does seem to be an improvement
| because you don't have to install the FB app on your phone
| or login to FB on your browser. The app in particular is
| such a roach motel I am very glad to get away from it.
| MikusR wrote:
| Source?
| nickthegreek wrote:
| I believe its now a Meta Account.
| justapassenger wrote:
| Whose backend should it be using? Apple's?
| lonelyasacloud wrote:
| >>Apple is the worst thing that could happen to VR
|
| Like they were for MP3 players, Smartphones, expensive
| headphones and Smartwatches?
| pandama wrote:
| I can't deploy my own developed app to my own devices
| permanently without paying $100/year.
|
| Yes, I use Android.
| thestevesie wrote:
| Removed the Facebook login? Lol, now it prompts me every-time
| I use it to create a Horizon's account. I personally couldn't
| care less about the facebook login, and really never saw what
| the big deal was. I created a facebook account which I only
| use for the quest 2. You're going to need an account, what
| does it matter which platform it is from?
|
| I'm sick of people criticizing Apple's walled garden. It's
| the primary feature of Apple products. It's what makes them
| what they are. If you don't like it, just buy something else.
| No one is forcing you to buy Apple if you don't like the
| walled garden. Many people like it and I'm amazed that there
| are so many people that don't understand that.
| chaostheory wrote:
| It's ironic, but I like and support meta so I agree with your
| points.
|
| Like meta, I also agree that Apple will be a double edged
| sword for XR. On the positive side, Apple will help the
| masses understand the potential of XR beyond gaming, and the
| M chips blow everything away. On the negative side, only
| we'll be able to afford a $3000 XR Apple headset which will
| save meta's XR related effort since they're the affordable
| option. They're scared of if, but whether or not Meta
| realizes it, meta needs that Apple headset to release
| jayd16 wrote:
| An Apple headset and marketing dollars would galvanize the
| industry. Meta will still release their headsets and probably
| be better off for it because Apple will have primed consumers
| to what the experience is. Apple doesn't usually pay for
| exclusives so apps will make it to other platforms.
| [deleted]
| lapser wrote:
| > Privacy options
|
| Are we talking about the same Meta company that owns
| Facebook?
|
| > they -removed- Facebook login
|
| Which they added in the first place, much to the dismay of
| literally everyone.
| cheriot wrote:
| Apple, on the other hand, loves to talk about privacy, but
| if anyone in the conversation backs up messages to iCloud
| then the whole thing is sitting on Apple's server
| unencrypted[1]. WhatsApp is better.
|
| [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2020/01/21
| /appl...
| camdat wrote:
| Do you expect an equivalent Apple product to not require an
| iCloud login?
| snvzz wrote:
| >"PSVR games are not compatible with PSVR2, because PSVR2 is
| designed to deliver a truly next-gen VR experience," explained
| Hideaki Nishino, a vice president of platform experience at Sony,
| in September.
|
| I can't help but facepalm at this.
| HelloMcFly wrote:
| $550, no wireless, no backwards compatibility, and no integrated
| audio forcing you to use your own earbuds linked to the PS5. The
| displays look great, sure, but the total package is a
| disappointment. I'm basically wrong at every prediction I make,
| but this looks like just another novelty toy with little chance
| of broad adoption.
| ErneX wrote:
| Fair criticism but it does come with headphones you can plug on
| the headset itself, granted it's not the same as integrated
| headphones but they include some in the box.
|
| You can of course use other ones, either plugged to the headset
| or wireless ones like the Pulse 3D.
| shock-value wrote:
| It's better than having integrated headphones I think. If the
| included ones (however basic they are) are in-ear, then the
| immersion and sound quality would likely be better than
| anything that would be attached to the headset.
|
| Onboard audio is just a waste of money for something that
| neither casuals nor enthusiasts would care about (former by
| definition, latter because they would prefer to use their own
| audio gear).
|
| Lack of wireless is a definite minus though.
| [deleted]
| pvg wrote:
| _no wireless_
|
| And less space than a Nomad!
| jshier wrote:
| What wireless tech could run 2 x (2000 x 2040) X 120Hz
| displays?
| intrasight wrote:
| WiFi 7 can. The tech will evolve. I assume the next
| generation will be wireless.
| tkk23 wrote:
| If VR is successful, can WiFi 7 handle a family of four
| playing their games in the evening, with neighbors who
| require the same bandwidth?
| HelloMcFly wrote:
| I think the question is: are those screens worth retaining a
| tether? Should a wireless experience have been prioritized?
| Those screen specs aren't a _given_.
|
| A wired VR headset for one's computer is already asking a
| lot, but bringing it to your living space is asking even
| more.
| smoldesu wrote:
| That's exactly what I came here to say. Buying PSVR2, a PS5 and
| a single game will easily run you over $1,000 - that's crazy.
| It doesn't even make sense why it would exist in the market;
| the $400 Quest 2 probably has a larger game library and better
| overall experience than the PSVR2. Premium customers have the
| Valve Index available at the $500-$600 price point, and further
| down the road it's expected to see Apple compete in the
| standalone premium headset market. This product makes zero
| sense in 2022, I sorta wish Sony spent some more time figuring
| it out.
| itsyaboi wrote:
| Where are you seeing the Valve Index for $500 (assuming not
| second hand)? Wouldn't mind picking one up for that price...
| smoldesu wrote:
| MSRP for the standalone headset is $500: https://store.stea
| mpowered.com/app/1059530/Valve_Index_Heads...
| branon wrote:
| That page says it requires the base stations. Can you use
| the headset as a standalone display output without base
| stations? I can think of at least one reason why people
| would. As long as you had a compatible media player and
| video file...
| sylens wrote:
| Yeah, I think the price by itself isn't a dealbreaker, it's
| all of the context. If I could hook this up to my PC and use
| it to play Half-Life Alyx, or scoop up a bunch of cheap PSVR1
| games on Black Friday to catch up on, it would be a much
| easier purchase for me.
| christkv wrote:
| I think its not going to be compatible with PSVR1 games
| unless they are patched.
| callahad wrote:
| > _another novelty toy with little chance of broad adoption._
|
| ...is that the fate of every console accessory? I can 't think
| of any accessories that would clear the "broad adoption" bar.
| The NES Zapper is the closest to subjective ubiquity in my
| mind, but even then its library was limited to Duck Hunt and a
| half dozen forgettable titles.
| RandallBrown wrote:
| The Microsoft Kinect had pretty wide adoption for a little
| while.
| [deleted]
| HelloMcFly wrote:
| I suppose I wasn't thinking of broad adoption just for PSVR,
| but adoption at levels that feels like it really grows the VR
| space. I don't think PSVR2 is going to grow the space much,
| but I really hoped that it _would_ so this is a
| disappointment.
|
| But again - every prediction I make is likely to be wrong.
| zerocrates wrote:
| Analog controllers for the PS1? They were only released later
| so you could call them accessories.
|
| Though a different situation when they eventually just bundle
| it with the console, I suppose.
| nathan_compton wrote:
| I can't believe they are launching a new PS5 peripheral when you
| can't even get a PS5 without a huge hassle or paying a big
| premium.
| _JamesA_ wrote:
| The PS5 CoD bundle is available on the PlayStation store[1]. It
| doesn't seem like much of a hassle to click a button.
|
| [1]: https://direct.playstation.com/en-
| us/consoles/console/playst...
| barbazoo wrote:
| It's not widely available in many other countries still.
| glenneroo wrote:
| I've been trying to get one since they came out for a
| friend and I just looked again: there is one company who
| has some in stock but they are asking 900EUR!
| qu4z-2 wrote:
| I was casually keeping an eye on websites, etc, and never
| found one. Then earlier this year I decided I really
| wanted one for Elden Ring, went in person to a games
| store and talked to them, and had one three weeks later.
| So that may be worth a shot.
| o_m wrote:
| They have sold 25M units, so it doesn't matter that its still
| hard to buy one.
| hbn wrote:
| I'm sure it depends on location but I've stumbled upon a few
| opportunities to buy a PS5 in Canada without explicitly trying.
|
| That said I haven't pulled the trigger because I can't justify
| a console + a game for $800 when there's really only one
| exclusive I want to play right now. And it's a remake of a game
| I already own/played (Demon's Souls)
| kmlx wrote:
| i think you're just a bit unlucky.
|
| try various twitter accounts that post real time ps5 stock
| updates.
| nerdjon wrote:
| I don't understand the market for a device like this at this
| cost.
|
| Are there really enough people that would spend this much on a VR
| system in a closed ecosystem instead of going with one attached
| to your PC that has access to everything?
|
| I bought the valve index (which is more than this) because I can
| use it with Steam and any VR games outside of steam. Plus
| modding.
|
| I feel like Sony should have subsidized the hardware more
| accounting for the fact that they will get money from every VR
| game sold for this thing. Otherwise I worry the market for it
| just won't make sense for developers (which then hurts anyone
| that bought it).
|
| Also the lack of PSVR1 support would make me seriously question
| buying this anyways, why invest in a platform if they are just
| going to make it so you can't play any of your games later (or
| requires you keep multiple VR's around)
| tantalor wrote:
| > attached to your PC
|
| PC is a closed ecosystem. Not everyone has PC.
| NineStarPoint wrote:
| Large contingent of people who don't have a PC strong enough to
| run VR but do have a PS5. Whether the PS5 will get a lively
| enough VR ecosystem going on it is still a concern though yeah.
| nerdjon wrote:
| I know there is a market for it, I just question if there is
| enough of a market given the price point they are going for.
|
| I guess that is what I don't understand. Yeah the tech is
| great but if its too expensive that enough people can't
| afford it than is there going to be enough people to justify
| developers to work on it.
|
| I just worry that this is seeing Sony being cocky again like
| they were with the PS3. Overestimating the market and putting
| out products that are more expensive with the justification
| that they are powerful.
| Tiktaalik wrote:
| What we know from decades of console industry winners and
| losers is that content and especially exclusive content is
| everything.
|
| It really doesn't matter if hardware is open or closed. What
| matters is whether there is fun compelling games.
|
| PS VR has been a success because the quality games have been
| there, and others have struggled because of their lack of
| quality games.
|
| We can expect that given Playstation's deep history in games
| and exclusive in house studios that they will have content for
| the platform. It's risky to expect the same of any other
| hardware maker without inhouse studios and decades old industry
| relationships and partnerships.
| stronglikedan wrote:
| This seems like half the price of a comparable PCVR setup,
| including the PS5 to run it. And there's probably still not
| much crossover between the console crowd and the PC gamer
| crowd.
| barbazoo wrote:
| My guess is it's the same reasons that drive people towards
| gaming consoles in the first place, mostly convenience.
| xvello wrote:
| > I don't understand the market for a device like this at this
| cost.
|
| I am a software engineer and OSS enthusiast, I operate servers
| and my home automation system, but I gave up on PC gaming years
| ago. After a long day of fighting distributed systems, I want
| my gaming rig to just work. That's why I bought the first PSVR:
| because Sony offers me a system where I don't have to fiddle
| with drivers and windows updates.
|
| Price is too steep indeed, but it will go down as the
| production ramps up. PSVR launched at 400EUR in 2016, and I
| bought it at 200EUR two years after that.
| sylens wrote:
| I would love to go with a console as my main platform, I just
| always have the feeling that Sony is ripping me off with the
| cost of games and PS Plus. Do you find it evens out in the
| long run with the larger upfront cost of a gaming PC?
| wara23arish wrote:
| I have both PS5 and a "gaming pc". I find myself using PS5
| for most of my games except for stuff like Civ and CK3.
|
| Also find PS plus to be fantastic, i barely buy games
| anymore individually.
| xvello wrote:
| I only play single-player and couch co-op games, so I don't
| pay for PS Plus. As for the game prices, sales are less
| massive than on Steam but still frequent. Just create your
| watchlist on psprices.com.
|
| The only thing I really miss is modding, especially
| quality-of-life improvement mods.
| ectospheno wrote:
| The hidden cost of a gaming pc is the time you inevitably
| spend keeping it working. The older I get the more I get
| annoyed by things that waste what time I have left. I game
| exclusively on my PS5 and XBox Series X and have no regrets
| about doing so. Every time I spend a few bucks more than I
| would on pc I just think about how much time I'm not
| wasting getting it to work at all. YMMV.
| iLoveOncall wrote:
| Then get a Quest 2.
|
| I could get behind your argument if there was no offering
| that doesn't require a gaming computer, but it's not the
| case.
| groffee wrote:
| So hyped for this, day one purchase for me.
| jdprgm wrote:
| Biggest downside here is probably sticking with Fresnel lenses,
| can't even really call it gen 2 with that decision. Probably had
| to be made to meet the price point I guess unfortunately.
|
| Should be a pretty clear screen though with the limited FOV and
| nice contrast. Haven't used PSVR1 myself and just checked
| resolution and WOW didn't realize how trash it was merely 960 x
| 1,080 that's lower than CV1! For anyone primarily experienced
| with PSVR ecosystem this should be a massive step up.
|
| Pimax just announced Crystal yesterday as well so glad to see
| movement in the VR space.
| augasur wrote:
| I have played a multiple times with a PSVR1, and in my opinion,
| it was one of the best optimized VR systems I have tried.
| Everything felt smooth, fully optimized, did not feel dizzy.
| The low resolution was the problem for me, I really loved it.
| Now waiting to test out PSVR2 when it launches.
| VLM wrote:
| The problem I see is my PSVR1 is dusty because I'm bored with it.
| It was a cool experience and battlezone was fun but maybe 20
| hours in and I'm done and its dusty.
|
| The marketing solution to the PSVR1 being boring is "its got more
| pixels and no backwards compatibility". That message is just not
| going to sell to upgraders like me. "It costs more" is not going
| to sell to people who couldn't/wouldn't pay for the PSVR1. So
| who's supposed to buy this, exactly? People who collect VR
| headsets is not a large enough market.
|
| The technology reminds me of the wii fit balance board. If you
| can't have 20 hours of fun with that, there's something wrong
| with you. Likewise, if you're having more than 20 hours of fun, I
| have to ask "how?" Its about as many hours of fun as a VR
| headset, but costs less. The balance board is just a few years
| older than VR headsets and nobody sells that type of tech
| anymore. That is the future of VR headsets.
|
| I think this is a valid HN story in the sense of being an object
| lesson in how not to sell something technological. Your marketing
| message needs to be aimed at a market and has to have a message,
| you can't just leave those two parts out and expect product
| success.
| jonny_eh wrote:
| My experience is identical to yours. I loved the PSVR but sold
| it 6 months later due to lack of use. Half-Life Alyx was the
| only game to come out for VR that I wish I could check out. But
| even that isn't worth the cost and space investment in a new
| headset.
| chaostheory wrote:
| 6 years is a lifetime in technology and a lot has changed.
| There are new use cases for VR since you last tried it.
|
| 1. Fitness - It's just a lot more fun to do when you're boxing
| in a Mike Tyson's Punch Out clone or slicing blocks with
| lightsabers. There are also VR specific fitness apps have a lot
| more variety than normal cardio exercises. In my case, I've
| lost 20 lbs to date... playing VR video games
|
| 2. Social - For friends and family who are hundreds or
| thousands of miles away, XR becomes a platform for hanging out
| with them while doing activities like ping pong, bowling, table
| top games, mini golf, and more. It has way more immersion and
| presence than a Zoom, Facetime, or normal phone call.
|
| I would try it out again one day before rushing to judgement.
| At least you tried it the first time though unlike everyone
| else.
| cassianoleal wrote:
| Link to the official blog post:
| https://blog.playstation.com/2022/11/02/playstation-vr2-laun...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-11-02 23:01 UTC)