5 ms·

It seems like there will be three tiers of VR... High-End VR: Gaming and graphic intensive applications will run on computers wired to special HMD systems. Viv

It seems like there will be three tiers of VR... High-End VR: Gaming and graphic intensive applications will run on computers wired to special HMD systems. Vive, Oculus and PSVR Smartphone VR: This will be the GearVR type experience, dedicated VR appstore of content. Casual VR: Google Cardboard type devices used for viewing 360 photos and video,download content from existing Play store and Apples App Store. full disclosure we are making and selling things in the casual VR category (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/smartvr-make-your-phone-a-virtual-reality-viewer/x/7469849#/ https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/smartvr-make-your-phone-a...)

Karunamon 11y ago
I'm not sure the PSVR can qualify as high end. And I'm not saying this as a subscriber to PC Master Race Weekly, I'm saying it with the limited specs of the PS4 in mind compared to even the minimum requirements of the Vive and Rift. Given how those requirements are just north of crazy right now, it follows that there must be something that was compromised on to allow the PSVR to work - and also keeping in mind that the Rift/Vive specs are that high just to get VR that's acceptably convincing.. I just can't work up the excitement. I'm hoping that I'm wrong here, and that they did some kind of insane algorithm or something to do a lot more with a lot less hardware. Anyone who's had hands on the device care to chime in?
- radiorental 11y ago
  What I took away from the video below was - no complaints, asking for another go = good enough! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYwAtfCAjwM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYwAtfCAjwM
- serge2k 11y ago
  The insane algorithm could just be "design games that need less power". I mean, why not?
  - ethbro 11y ago
    We're talking about a PS4 with roughly an AMD 7870 under the hood vs a minimum 290 spec'd for the Rift. Using Passmark, that's 4289 vs 6875. Admittedly, there are a ton of caveats to those comparisons, and the PS4 has the benefit of system integration, a standard platform, and a dedicated OS. But that's still a fairly substantial difference. Especially when framerate & latency are no longer quite as optional and able to be fudged.
  - Karunamon 11y ago
    And maybe it is just that simple - you don't need super high detail to convey presence. I just wish I could get my hand on one and see with my own eyes. With VR, there's no substitute.
    - georgemcbay 11y ago
      "And maybe it is just that simple - you don't need super high detail to convey presence." In my experience with various modern VR systems this is absolutely the case. Latency and proper movement tracking is non-negotiable when it comes to achieving an eerie feeling of presence in the simulated virtual world, but rendering detail is far more optional. Nice to have if you're going for true reality, but not required. If they've nailed the latency and tracking (I haven't used a PSVR so I don't know if they have) the lesser detail will be lost in the noise, sort of like it is now when you compare the PC version of a game (say, the Division, for a contemporary example) to the console versions. Everyone knows the PC versions of these games are capable of looking better in A/B tests, but many people are perfectly happy with the lesser detailed version. I buy PC/console releases on console far more often than on PC despite having a powerful enough PC to run new games just because I find avoiding the pitfalls of driver versions, the perfectly standardized voice communications for multiplayer, etc more valuable to me than the extra rendering detail.
CoolGuySteve 11y ago
I don't get why there's not a greater push to get smartphone/casual VR streaming from the PC using a wired video connection. Seems much easier to justify a $700 phone purchase that just happens to have decent VR as a feature than it is to justify purchasing a $600 dedicated headset. But I guess by throwing their chips in with the Vive Pre, Valve decided not to port their in-home streaming + some stereoscopy to phones. Maybe they found it lacking?
- CookieMon 11y ago
  I tried a VRBox (a plastic version of the Cardboard) and it had zero presence, it feels like looking through a high tech "look anywhere" View‐Master — which is frickin cool in its own right if you ever liked View‐Master (like me), but it isn't VR. I realized even my low-end game ideas wouldn't work on that kind of device. It left me with a fear that devices like this would shape mainstream perception of VR as a pointless gimmick, but it sounds like the PS4 may be coming to the rescue. (Edit: I think I misread your comment, you are suggesting high‐end headsets with proper head-tracking, fresnal‐hybrid lenses etc. — the works — except for the screen part which is supplied by a modern smartphone with a low-latency video port?)

Karunamon 11y ago

I'm not sure the PSVR can qualify as high end. And I'm not saying this as a subscriber to PC Master Race Weekly, I'm saying it with the limited specs of the PS4 in mind compared to even the minimum requirements of the Vive and Rift. Given how those requirements are just north of crazy right now, it follows that there must be something that was compromised on to allow the PSVR to work - and also keeping in mind that the Rift/Vive specs are that high just to get VR that's acceptably convincing.. I just can't work up the excitement. I'm hoping that I'm wrong here, and that they did some kind of insane algorithm or something to do a lot more with a lot less hardware. Anyone who's had hands on the device care to chime in?

radiorental 11y ago
What I took away from the video below was - no complaints, asking for another go = good enough! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYwAtfCAjwM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYwAtfCAjwM
serge2k 11y ago
The insane algorithm could just be "design games that need less power". I mean, why not?
- ethbro 11y ago
  We're talking about a PS4 with roughly an AMD 7870 under the hood vs a minimum 290 spec'd for the Rift. Using Passmark, that's 4289 vs 6875. Admittedly, there are a ton of caveats to those comparisons, and the PS4 has the benefit of system integration, a standard platform, and a dedicated OS. But that's still a fairly substantial difference. Especially when framerate & latency are no longer quite as optional and able to be fudged.
- Karunamon 11y ago
  And maybe it is just that simple - you don't need super high detail to convey presence. I just wish I could get my hand on one and see with my own eyes. With VR, there's no substitute.
  - georgemcbay 11y ago
    "And maybe it is just that simple - you don't need super high detail to convey presence." In my experience with various modern VR systems this is absolutely the case. Latency and proper movement tracking is non-negotiable when it comes to achieving an eerie feeling of presence in the simulated virtual world, but rendering detail is far more optional. Nice to have if you're going for true reality, but not required. If they've nailed the latency and tracking (I haven't used a PSVR so I don't know if they have) the lesser detail will be lost in the noise, sort of like it is now when you compare the PC version of a game (say, the Division, for a contemporary example) to the console versions. Everyone knows the PC versions of these games are capable of looking better in A/B tests, but many people are perfectly happy with the lesser detailed version. I buy PC/console releases on console far more often than on PC despite having a powerful enough PC to run new games just because I find avoiding the pitfalls of driver versions, the perfectly standardized voice communications for multiplayer, etc more valuable to me than the extra rendering detail.

CoolGuySteve 11y ago

I don't get why there's not a greater push to get smartphone/casual VR streaming from the PC using a wired video connection. Seems much easier to justify a $700 phone purchase that just happens to have decent VR as a feature than it is to justify purchasing a $600 dedicated headset. But I guess by throwing their chips in with the Vive Pre, Valve decided not to port their in-home streaming + some stereoscopy to phones. Maybe they found it lacking?

CookieMon 11y ago
I tried a VRBox (a plastic version of the Cardboard) and it had zero presence, it feels like looking through a high tech "look anywhere" View‐Master — which is frickin cool in its own right if you ever liked View‐Master (like me), but it isn't VR. I realized even my low-end game ideas wouldn't work on that kind of device. It left me with a fear that devices like this would shape mainstream perception of VR as a pointless gimmick, but it sounds like the PS4 may be coming to the rescue. (Edit: I think I misread your comment, you are suggesting high‐end headsets with proper head-tracking, fresnal‐hybrid lenses etc. — the works — except for the screen part which is supplied by a modern smartphone with a low-latency video port?)