Jump to content

- - - - -

PlayStation VR


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#1
Pookachoo

Pookachoo

    Royal Sack

  • Administrators
  • 2,404 posts

US and Canada gamers can able to pre-order the bundle, which comes with two move controllers, ps camera, and ear buds: http://www.pushsquar..._usa_and_canada

The stand alone VR set (just the view screen): http://blog.us.plays...-start-tuesday/

Apparently when this hot new items when on sale for pre-order in the UK, it sold out in 7 minutes, so you had to be quick like a ninja if you wanted to be one of the first to have these! :Ninja:

I plan to get a VR headset, but I'll be waiting a little while. I already have my two moves and camera, and pro quality headphones (I hate earbuds!), so I don't need the bundle.
Also I wonder how PSVR will fair once it hits the consumer market - will Sony get it right on the first try, or will there be a new and improved model following close behind?


Edit: Quite a few of us have a camera and one Move already and just need a second controller. I suggest trying Amazon for buying a new one, and Gamestop for buying used (in US anyway).
I don't like to advertise for any company, but I do want to help out my fellow gamers and I know cost is often and issue :)
  • b-coli, outinunsurb, Alexissovaw and 8 others like this

#2
sackboy206

sackboy206

    Hot Shot Sack

  • MembersAwaitingApproval
  • PipPipPip
  • 234 posts
  • LocationWales, UK

I think Sony will nail it. They've revolutionized gaming with the Playstation, and now they bring us the next step in gaming with VR. I'd be very surprised if they mess it up. Personally, I won't be getting the VR headset. I'd rather play games on a TV in an open, well lit environment whilst being able to look around at other things rather than having my vision encased. I'm sure it'll sell great though :)

 

sackboy206


  • Pookachoo and Yonderland like this

#3
katanagirl1

katanagirl1

    Royal Sack

  • Honoured Sacks
  • 2,006 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, AZ, USA

If I were thinking of getting this, I'd wait for a while.  The first generation always has some bugs to work out.  They'll get tons of feedback from the "early adopters" who have to have the latest in everything and for whom money is no object.  Then there will be improvements on that feedback.  Also, if it doesn't catch on like all the hype has suggested, there might be a price drop later on.


  • Pookachoo likes this
Posted Image

#4
Pookachoo

Pookachoo

    Royal Sack

  • Administrators
  • 2,404 posts

I'm especially interested in VR for Dreams, which will take a while. I do think Sony is getting better at getting things right on the first try, wouldn't be surprised to see some improvements made after the initial release though. And the potential for a price drop is also a good point.

 

I liked the 5 min VR demo I did at PSX, could be that over longer periods it would make my eyes tired. I imagine that I'll enjoy doing a fair bit of gaming in VR, but probably not a majority of my gaming time. I like being available to interact a bit more with the husband and the cat ;)


  • katanagirl1 likes this

#5
katanagirl1

katanagirl1

    Royal Sack

  • Honoured Sacks
  • 2,006 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, AZ, USA

The gaming industry hasn't been too keen on creating products that keep people with disabilities in mind.  Glasses aren't a disability per se, but wearing a VR headset on top of them would be incredibly uncomfortable.  I believe the technology could theoretically support a display screen that could take a glasses prescription as input and then interpolate the pixels on the screen to account for the difference in vision.  Then you wouldn't need to wear your glasses to play.  

 

You need a high order polynomial fit and the ability to do interpixel interpolation to do that, but it is feasible.  Maybe in the future that will be a possibility, once the product is out there and popularity is high, and a reasonable profit has been made to reinvest in that research and development.


Posted Image

#6
Pookachoo

Pookachoo

    Royal Sack

  • Administrators
  • 2,404 posts

The gaming industry hasn't been too keen on creating products that keep people with disabilities in mind.  Glasses aren't a disability per se, but wearing a VR headset on top of them would be incredibly uncomfortable.  I believe the technology could theoretically support a display screen that could take a glasses prescription as input and then interpolate the pixels on the screen to account for the difference in vision.  Then you wouldn't need to wear your glasses to play.  

 

You need a high order polynomial fit and the ability to do interpixel interpolation to do that, but it is feasible.  Maybe in the future that will be a possibility, once the product is out there and popularity is high, and a reasonable profit has been made to reinvest in that research and development.

 

I heard that the PSVR design did actually have corrective lenses in mind, did a quick search and found this article: http://www.kotaku.co...ts-with-glasses

Author, who wears glasses, says that all the VR headsets she tried did fit - but Playstation's was the most comfortable.



#7
katanagirl1

katanagirl1

    Royal Sack

  • Honoured Sacks
  • 2,006 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, AZ, USA
Yeah, I'd read that, but in my own experience even those flimsy 3D glasses you get at the theater are uncomfortable to wear over glasses, so I'm not too optimistic.

By the way, I think the Sony VR is the only one that will work on PS4 from what I've read. The other ones are PC only.
Posted Image

#8
KittyRainbows

KittyRainbows

    猫の虹

  • Happy Sacks
  • 425 posts
  • Location奈良 , 日本
I saw the ad online yesterday for the vr headset. I wonder just how comfortable they actually are with glasses, as katanagirl1 mentioned, even the 3D glasses are not comfortable over glasses.
And some people have different styles and sizes of glasses, to fit the vr headset over.

#9
katanagirl1

katanagirl1

    Royal Sack

  • Honoured Sacks
  • 2,006 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, AZ, USA

I saw the ad online yesterday for the vr headset. I wonder just how comfortable they actually are with glasses, as katanagirl1 mentioned, even the 3D glasses are not comfortable over glasses.
And some people have different styles and sizes of glasses, to fit the vr headset over.

 

Do you know that, in addition to regular glasses (for people like me who can't see anything without them) and reading glasses, there are gaming/computer glasses? That's because of the different distances involved, reading distance is closer than computer and gaming requirements.

 

The last time I got glasses I had to get the progressive lenses, so now I can't afford to get another pair, so expensive!  It's almost cheaper to get Lasik instead of one pair of those (wish I could do Lasik).

 

:


Posted Image

#10
KittyRainbows

KittyRainbows

    猫の虹

  • Happy Sacks
  • 425 posts
  • Location奈良 , 日本
I did not know that there was computer glasses.
I too have to wear glasses sometimes. They get in the way. Sometimes I wear contact lenses but they are a pain to put in lol.
I have been thinking about eye surgery but I am worried about how it would go. >~<
But I am not sure how I would get on with computer glasses.

#11
Merlin

Merlin

    abracadabra

  • Sack Stars
  • 689 posts
I read somewhere this thing will need a co-processor, since a PS4 simply can't push 1080p at the required 90 frames per second to prevent disorientation. The headset plugs into what looks like a power brick, which then plugs into the PS4.

Since we need GPUs that do 4/8K at 90Hz for good VR it will hopefully drive the market to make even more powerful hardware for cheaper. Phones gave VR tiny high resolution displays and VR will give phones crazy graphics processors in return, it's the circle of life.

#12
katanagirl1

katanagirl1

    Royal Sack

  • Honoured Sacks
  • 2,006 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, AZ, USA

I read somewhere this thing will need a co-processor, since a PS4 simply can't push 1080p at the required 90 frames per second to prevent disorientation. The headset plugs into what looks like a power brick, which then plugs into the PS4.

Since we need GPUs that do 4/8K at 90Hz for good VR it will hopefully drive the market to make even more powerful hardware for cheaper. Phones gave VR tiny high resolution displays and VR will give phones crazy graphics processors in return, it's the circle of life.

I never thought of it before, but does a small screen for VR really need 1080p?  I mean, that is the definition of HD, but the pixels would have to be nearly sub-atomic.  I would think you could downsample and drop by a factor of two in each dimension and probably not notice the difference.  That close to your face the frame rate would be crucial, though.

 

I did not know that there was computer glasses.
I too have to wear glasses sometimes. They get in the way. Sometimes I wear contact lenses but they are a pain to put in lol.
I have been thinking about eye surgery but I am worried about how it would go. >~<
But I am not sure how I would get on with computer glasses.

 

I wish I could wear contacts, I don't mind the inconvenience.  I will have to wait a few more years for cataract surgery to correct my vision.


Posted Image

#13
KittyRainbows

KittyRainbows

    猫の虹

  • Happy Sacks
  • 425 posts
  • Location奈良 , 日本
@Katanagirl1
Oh no sorry to hear about the cataracts, one of my grandparents had that. Tbh contact lenses aren't the greatest, you have to have trouble putting them in and then sometimes they move or get annoying lol, not sure if anyone else has the same amount of trouble I do with lenses though :) They are ok once you get them in but sometimes glasses are just easier to put on and just get on with the day lol.

#14
EnochRoot

EnochRoot

    pop,pop,poppity,POP!

  • Administrators
  • 11,864 posts

I would really like to have a hands on try before I buy session...who knows I might be one of the unlucky people who suffer from nausea, disorientation and motion sickness when using this sort of equipment. It'd be a real pain to but this only to discover that after the purchase.


  • b-coli likes this

Enochrootsignature.png
3729682643_92edd74d92_o.png
Ironically, irony is wasted on those with no sense of ironism...Oh the irony!
 


#15
gdn001

gdn001

    Fallen Soldier

  • MembersAwaitingApproval
  • Pip
  • 49 posts
  • LocationSC - Brazil
So far I have only tried VR at a local tech expo. At these events, they're used for everything but gaming (I tried one for touring apartments for sale)
The biggest deal for me (aside from cost) is compatibility with existing games. No point of buying a 200$(?) device to play one or two gimmick exclusives or get a half-baked experience on most games. :/

Besides that, I still look forward to VR technology, even if it has to be "on site".
  • Yonderland likes this

egfi8Cx.gif


#16
katanagirl1

katanagirl1

    Royal Sack

  • Honoured Sacks
  • 2,006 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, AZ, USA

I would really like to have a hands on try before I buy session...who knows I might be one of the unlucky people who suffer from nausea, disorientation and motion sickness when using this sort of equipment. It'd be a real pain to but this only to discover that after the purchase.

Yeah, what a bummer! I suppose if you suffer from sinus problems it would exacerbate the problem. Congested head=balance/orientation problems.

Maybe amazon.com will eventually sell them and you can invoke their famous iron-clad return policy!
:P
Posted Image

#17
xerorogue

xerorogue

    Royal Sack

  • Moderators
  • 3,953 posts
  • LocationTX

I think this is going to be a pass for me until v2.0 comes out, then I can MAYBE get 1.0. The price tag is just too hefty for me. It's like buying a whole new system. Nah, I'll keep...well, maybe I could get it though. Because it will play ALL PS4 games and make them look like you're playing on a 275" screen and I'm currently on an old "fat back" 32" tv. The PVR might would be cheaper than getting a TV. 


  • b-coli likes this

cN8xRl2.png

 

4CwzOsj.png86IDVYo.png

Follow me on the Twitter @bioswoop

At the end of the day it's just a game, so chill the ____ out.


#18
Merlin

Merlin

    abracadabra

  • Sack Stars
  • 689 posts

I never thought of it before, but does a small screen for VR really need 1080p?  I mean, that is the definition of HD, but the pixels would have to be nearly sub-atomic.  I would think you could downsample and drop by a factor of two in each dimension and probably not notice the difference.  That close to your face the frame rate would be crucial, though.


There's a simulation so you can see what different resolutions look like in VR. The sim is not quite accurate though, since the lenses help merge pixels towards the centre of the field of view.

As for the size of the pixels there's apparently 100,000,000 atoms in an inch, so it's just a case of division. I worked it out as each sub-pixel being ~15,000 atoms across for a 5" 8K screen. I dunno if it's possible (or even makes any sense) to make pixels that small either.
  • katanagirl1 likes this

#19
gdn001

gdn001

    Fallen Soldier

  • MembersAwaitingApproval
  • Pip
  • 49 posts
  • LocationSC - Brazil

There's a simulation so you can see what different resolutions look like in VR. The sim is not quite accurate though, since the lenses help merge pixels towards the centre of the field of view.As for the size of the pixels there's apparently 100,000,000 atoms in an inch, so it's just a case of division. I worked it out as each sub-pixel being ~15,000 atoms across for a 5" 8K screen. I dunno if it's possible (or even makes any sense) to make pixels that small either.


How big are the human eye cells again? I figure that they would be a reasonable minimum size. I tried one of the earlier Oculus models, you could see the individual pixels. Can't remember the resolution tho.

egfi8Cx.gif


#20
katanagirl1

katanagirl1

    Royal Sack

  • Honoured Sacks
  • 2,006 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, AZ, USA

 

I never thought of it before, but does a small screen for VR really need 1080p?  I mean, that is the definition of HD, but the pixels would have to be nearly sub-atomic.  I would think you could downsample and drop by a factor of two in each dimension and probably not notice the difference.  That close to your face the frame rate would be crucial, though.


There's a simulation so you can see what different resolutions look like in VR. The sim is not quite accurate though, since the lenses help merge pixels towards the centre of the field of view.

As for the size of the pixels there's apparently 100,000,000 atoms in an inch, so it's just a case of division. I worked it out as each sub-pixel being ~15,000 atoms across for a 5" 8K screen. I dunno if it's possible (or even makes any sense) to make pixels that small either.

 

Yeah...it was a slight exaggeration for pixel size, just to be humorous (...or not).  Of course, atom size is not constant, it depends on how far along in the periodic table it is, but from our perspective in this discussion it's not relevant.

 

Not sure what it the smallest thing a human eye can see.  I'd look it up but I've got to get back to my LBP3 level and see if I can actually fit some decorations in there before it breaks.

 

Also, I think it comes down to the FOV (field of view) at that distance, not the size of the cones on your retina.  So close to the eye, the pixels would have to be smaller than your TV across the room.  Didn't think of that earlier.  Maybe HD is required just for that.

 

EDIT:

Interesting - those Rift pixels look rectangular, not square.  It might be due to a projection, though.


Edited by katanagirl1, 28 March 2016 - 05:03 PM.

Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


IPB skins by Skinbox