If we have a Project Morpheus thread, I couldn't find it. I really like the way Sony appears to be marketing this:
Plus, as discussed in that series' thread, Danganronpa would be a killer app for me.
Printable View
If we have a Project Morpheus thread, I couldn't find it. I really like the way Sony appears to be marketing this:
Plus, as discussed in that series' thread, Danganronpa would be a killer app for me.
One thing I am curious about, and it may have already been stated and I couldn't tell for sure from that video, is can this be used simply as head mounted screen? Could I play any PS4 game on the PSVR and simply have it displayed? I'm all for what VR has to offer, but it would certainly be nice to play games that have no VR functionality with it as well.
Meaningless until there's a killer app.
Do not want.
I definitely want it, but unless there's a couple of great games that take full advantage of its capabilities and aren't available on PC I'm not going to bother.
Technologically Sony's HMD isn't super thrilling compared to the Valve and Oculus headsets, but I'm interested in seeing Sony push decently-budgeted VR projects instead of minigames and demos.
Thing is, so far, Oculus seems to at least be matching Sony's efforts in that area. Playstation VR and the Rift are both getting EVE Valkyrie, which could be the first big-budget polished VR title, but Oculus is also funding that Insomniac game and Lucky's Tale. The rest of the Playstation VR stuff seems bite-sized.
I wouldn't go that far, since VR demos and minigames can be pretty amazing while the whole thing is still novel, but I ultimately agree that VR needs real-ass Great Games. It has some pretty good games (Alien Isolation, Elite Dangerous, Quake 2, Trackmania 2), and they're certainly better in VR than in traditional play, but they're inconvenient configuration-wise and overall far from polished in their VR implementation. Not consumer-ready.Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
VR aside, if be perfectly happy if it doubles as a second screen for regular games. I could play Phantom Pain forever.
You don't need a bright screen an inch in front of your face to do that. This stuff is going to nuke eyeballs.
Fuck your melatonin.
I don't think I need a thing that makes games even more immersive. I already have trouble disconnecting and rewiring my brain after a few hours.
Since we somehow don't have a Drive Club thread, I guess impressive reports of its VR performance fit here.
I think a lot of those dumb threads that will never see more than a few posts would fit here.
But then you can never find that information again. These threads should really be for hardware or UI discussions and not games at all. I just don't care enough about Drive Club to give it a thread. If my mod powers weren't stolen with no warning or explanation, I'd sift through the PS4 thread and build a real Drive Club thread, but otherwise, that ship has sailed.
I'm just being a jerk.
I know, but I wanted to explain the logic to the clouds anyway.
They'll be lost either way. Search is busted.
Because what the mainstream audience wants more than paying $400 to play the same types of games they've been playing for 8 years, only prettier, it's paying another $400-500 on top of that for what amounts to the old-timey movies of watching a train drive towards a camera and think it's real.
But the PS4 is selling well, despite all this supposed creative stagnation (lol). And who actually expects VR to be an immediate smartphone-level success?
Anybody paying attention knows that this is early days and adoption is expected to be slow. Enough to support the creation of hardware and software, but slow.
Bundle the headset with the system at $400 and they might have something, but they're going to have to take a bath on the hardware costs for a bit.
I don't see how they hope to do that, when Oculus is already saying the Rift will be priced like a console all on its own.Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
The must-gets of this year are more Call of Duties, more Witchers, more Assassin's Creeds...and even all that is 'better on PC(tm)' so 'supposed'...sure, whatever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tain
Also, PS4's runaway success is based on what, exactly? Ignoring that mobile exists? Pretending that last gen never happened? It's doing better than One or Wii U, but that's hardly a high bar to get over.
Nobody's going to buy in to this thing in the beginning unless it's basically given away, IMO. Playing at a friends' house is going to have 1000x the impact of seeing a commercial about it.
Getting a console to 'own' the concept of Home VR would be a big boon, but it ain't gonna be this generation.
If this generation outlives its usefulness to the extent the last one did, I think there's plenty of time for VR to catch on. The open question for me is still if the PS4 is powerful enough to actually do it correctly.
More Witchers? Seriously? It's the third game over an eight year period, and the developer puts more effort into each game than most do in three of their games. You also left out Bloodborne, which has a similar level of care, though admittedly that extended series is starting to come out pretty often.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hero
:wtf: The PS4 and One are badly outselling both the 360 and PS3 at the equivalent time in that generation. Why is a completely different question.Quote:
Also, PS4's runaway success is based on what, exactly? Ignoring that mobile exists? Pretending that last gen never happened? It's doing better than One or Wii U, but that's hardly a high bar to get over.
I'm not sure power is the issue so much as 'making compelling content'. I bet we do get some gems out of it, there are tons of developers throwing stuff against the wall trying to do anything interesting. The basic issue of 'why does this specific game need a headset instead of a screen' seems to be a tough one to address.
I see most of the wall throwing happening on PC though. Why pay console licensing fees if you're being experimental and might flop? I also suspect the adoption rate will be far higher on PC if you do get something to stick. Granted, you won't have Sony marketing for you, but that's likely for more "safe" projects.
If Sony wants to sell a bajillion units, they just need to get EA to make Madden VR. The NFL is using the tech already. It apparently helped Brandon Weeden check down on every drop back for three and a half games.
Brandon Weeden is an inspiration to inappropriately old guys still skulking around college campuses. I'll buy any product he's involved with.
Remember your comment re: Cassel and how you could have gone 8-8 in 2008? Imagine how low the bar to VR success is if Weeden found in invaluable.
:lol:
vr is awesome though
As usual I don't know what Hero is on about. PS4 is one of the best selling consoles ever.
Flashes of ESPN NFL 2K5's first person mode........ okay I am fine now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Most important:
Never liked the sound effects in Rez. That whole video sounds like torture.
I was waiting for Sony to post it as not to give some asshat views.
I assumed this was a Rez sequel when I saw the title. Disappointing.
Sony tried really hard to make me not care about VR today. Thankfully, Rez, 100 Foot Robot Golf, and Golem all helped lessen the pain a little.
That Palmer Luckey pose lol
Why do people playing VR games with controllers always adopt a 'pissing on a tree' pose?
The alternative stance looks kinda goofy.
http://www.the-nextlevel.com/tnl/att...1&d=1449375615
According to the GameStop CEO, this won't arrive until fall. My credit card points will be ready!
Makes sense. It's mid-February, and if Sony was keeping to the announced first half of 2016 release they should have started something by now.
Vr is so 1995. Wake me up with I cam get it to 3D scan things into solidworks.
3D scanners are so 2014.
Unless you're scanning boxes, expect it to take years to render.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fe 26
Firewatch would have been good in vr
I don't even like VR and I agree with that.
Launch: October 2016, $399 US
And there's an exclusive: a Star Wars Battlefront VR experience. "We'll have more news about this in the months ahead."
This looks really solid for an entry-level, mass consumer device. I've picked my horse in this race already, but this looks very good.
Credit card points are locked and loaded.Quote:
Originally Posted by Error
I don't have the camera, or the move controllers, Blegh. Still cheaper than an Oculus and a 970.
Ya I think I'll be preordering. Be nice if I don't have to buy another copy of bf
I have the camera. I have at least one of the move wands. Excellent Smithers.
I have a Move controller + wand but I don't have the PS4 camera so I haven't tested it on the PS4. I wonder if they ever updated the firmware to make Move something besides garbage.
I'll wait and see on this.
Justi wants this bad. I remain uninterested.
Fuck RezVR.
moves always worked great for me, and i forget what game i used move on on PS4 but it worked fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by MechDeus
Not super-thrilled at needing to get a PS4 camera separately, but at least Move controllers are dirt cheap.
-edit- $44 on Amazon for the PS4 camera. Not bad. Not great, but just this side of acceptable.
A lot of the Move units worked just fine. A lot of them didn't. It seemed to be a firmware issue with the Move itself, and people testing different Moves on the same PS3 yielded different results. Sometimes you could fix it by disabling one of features through the PS3 system menu but that didn't always work for everyone and sometimes made it worse and caused it to drift even faster. As one of the people with a unit that could only stay centered for seconds at a time (playing Killzone 3 meant I would eventually be aiming at almost a 45 degree angle to try and shoot straight) I would need to know there's a fix before I'd drop $399 US dollars on something that's paired up with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by B-Ri
Picked up a used Move controller that came with the gun attachment plus charger station for $11 today. The gun attachment wasn't necessary or even likely to ever be used, but it feels surprisingly solid and was free with the controller so why not? I'll never use it but I kind of like that I have one.
Check out the Move light gun games on PS3 if that sounds interesting to you. There aren't many, but they are pretty great. Time Crisis Razing Storm with a Sharpshooter is one of my favorite experiences of last gen.
Is it the goofy looking red/white handgun? I hate how it looks, but it's the most comfortable shell I've used with the move, and I've tried a bunch. Get you the HotD games and you'll learn to appreciate the Move. Even marginal stuff like The Shoot (which should yld be fairly close to free at your local gamestop) is pretty enjoyable.
Seriously, the Move was awesome for the 5 games that supported it.
There are so many light gun shooters that I never bothered with the other gimmick games.
The only game I put a lot of time into that wasn't a light gun game was Resistance 3, which was a decent game made kinda awesome with a sharpshooter. I played a little Heavy Rain but it didn't really add anything to the experience.
Medievil moves was decent. I hear the Move controls added to RE5 Gold edition were good as well.
But the standout applications were clearly the Wonderbook game(s!). It was only recently that I learned that they actually released more than one.
Ben Schachter of Macquarie Securities expects this to sell eight million units in 24 months and for Sony to "utterly dominate the rest of the console cycle."
edit: Perhaps more interestingly, here is what the external hardware actually does. Most importantly, "it provides no extra GPU or CPU power."
It just does stuff that every VR application needs done. Makes sense.
Agreed, but I was only half joking when I told tain on Twitter that Battlefront on PSVR would look like Shadows of the Empire on N64. And, yes, I'll own it.
I've been kind of wondering how PSVR games look as good as they do at 90 (or 120)Hz. Turns out, that's where that little box comes in, and it's actually pretty interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
The PS4 is actually rendering the game at half the framerate. So if it's 90Hz, the PS4 is displaying 45 frames a second, and then that little box is warping the view based on the low-latency tracking to create in-between frames. This allows for smooth enough motion not to disrupt the player's sense of presence without having to draw every frame.
Obviously this has its drawbacks and it won't be completely unnoticeable, but it's a pretty clever compromise that goes a long way to explaining how this is possible on their hardware.
It is pretty neat, and sounds a bit asynchronous timewarpy (Oculus software-side technique), but it sounds like 60fps is still the minimum:
http://cdn2.24live.co/images/2016/03...9a12abe3db.jpg
I wonder how many PSVR games will actually pull off 120hz with 120hz scanout. I'm betting very, very few over the course of the generation.
PS4 has more than enough power to run a good looking game at 60fps. Yea, it's not gonna look like Arkham Knight, but that's ok.
2x viewports isn't cheap, even at half-resolution per eye, and most 1080p VR software tries to render at higher than 1080p to really avoid jaggies. There's the extra FOV, too. I'm impressed at how nice the visuals are in the games they've shown, all things considered.
It'll be cool to compare this Battlefront VR thing to the original game just to see what corners have to be cut.
Whatever Llamasoft is up to, they're pretty proud of keeping the 120FPS counter solid. Apparently there's a good story about why it's taking so long to announce, but the game itself is coming along nicely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tain
My money is on it being a Llamasoft rendition of Eugene Jarvis's Blaster, by the way.
Oh sure, give away the You Win! screen.
Sony's not fucking around, huh? They really are putting a big push to get quality content on this thing. I'm not getting a second piece of VR hardware, but I respect what they're doing big time. I hope my girlfriend buys one.
Ugh. Don't give IGN hits. Wait for the official one.
Do they get hits with embedded videos? I thought that's why some people locked out that function.
What even was that Batman trailer?
Its whats known as a tease.
watching the trailers i was thinking "that looks like it'll make me sick" "that's too scary" "that's too shooty"
i don't understand what the kids are doing anymore, i'm too old for the video games now
It wasn't even that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Error
Years ago, like late highschool or early college a friend of mine went to Japan. He came back with these "tv goggles"- basically a headset with the equivalent of a 70", maybe larger tv projected inside.
I shut off all the lights and used it to play through the first Silent Hill. It was 2spooky. Scary VR games are going to be nuts.
Seriously. Is it a new game, is it just the old games put into VR, some kind of explanation would be nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by MechDeus
The one that gave me this feeling was the Dishonored 2 trailer, a compilation of neck stabbings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Finch
What's odd about that is that it's arguably not even the right way to play the game. It's like playing Hitman or Assassin's Creed and fighting everybody on the way to the target.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Robot Bit Me
They're all games that reward stealth but excel at being able to adapt to any situation. Thief, on the other hand, is a game where it's often a death sentence to be seen.
More than those games, though, I don't think Dishonored is supposed to have a "right way" to play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Yeah, that's why I added the "arguably." The high chaos route is so odd within the story though.