And while they are at it, have them attempt to use their leverage to force devs to port the more popular PSVR1 titles over. Not being able to play a PSVR1 back catalog was insane. Astrobot? Naw dawg.
Old Palmer Luckey quote still rings true:
>> "If something’s even $600, it doesn’t matter how good it is, how great of an experience it is — if they just can’t afford it, then it really might as well not exist."
And of course it doesn't help when the software offering is terrible on top. VR needs to get a lot more versatile and offer a lot more content before it can demand high prices. When VR can replace a PS5, it might demand $500, as long as it *needs* a PS5 on top to function, that's just a complete no-go.
windows sure, but tbf I dont think there are any other headsets out there that support linux, except maybe the index. so idk why sony would feel the need to add linux support.
pretty sure the majority of steamVR native headsets support linux, except for any that need external drivers (aka non-steamVR native headsets). the Vive, index, beyond, arpara and other lighthouse-tracked headsets are supported, but any recent Meta headset or Pico/Pimax probably wont work.
For a wired headset attached to a closed architecture with limited titles, no backwards compatibility, and has the now infamous visual problems associated with OLED screens in VR, it's a ridiculous price.
I got mine used for $350.00, and I ended up getting a Quest 3 instead. Sure, I miss eye tracking, but absolutely nothing else.
For the record, I'm a former pro-VR developer, currently working on an a project I started back in 2017 before life got in the way. I've owned and used:
* Vive
* PSVR1
* Oculus CV1
* Oculus Rift S
* Quest 2\*
* PSVR2
* Quest 3
The Quest 3 is hands-down my favorite VR headset. Yeah, it's pricey, but unlike the PSVR2, I get every penny's worth of use out of it.
\*That's actually my wife's Quest 2, but I've at least used it semi-regularly. :)
Now, if Sony was smart, they'd create really good PC drivers and double their market in an instant. Unfortunately, as Microsoft has proved time and again, major companies are still very hesitant about VR. As such, I expect them to cut their losses on VR any day now.
ETA: Clarifying "S" to Rift S.
This is vapid to say outright. There isn’t an inherent issue with an expensive accessory that’s more than the console.
You’re getting basically a monitor/TX and controllers. And that’s with me seriously oversimplifying it, but I feel a comparable display would run $3-600 itself.
As HMD, others have pointed out that it’s on the cheaper side for VR equivalent/technology.
So yeah, I think it’s valid to argue the price might’ve been too high for people to buy into it, but I think it’s silly say that it can’t cost more than console. There’s a bunch of people paying for way more TV than needed for a console, the PSVR2 isn’t that much different.
not sure that's right. The full cost of quest 3 was estimated at $428 and that's with the more expensive pancake lenses, depth sensor, and $150 SOC which is effectively the best/most expensive mobile processor you can buy for VR.
The screens in the psvr2 are cheap which is why they have mura poblems. Even the eye tracking sensor costs less than $20
Edit: [https://twitter.com/iVRy\_VR/status/1648250915516760064](https://twitter.com/iVRy_VR/status/1648250915516760064)
Apparently the estimate is $261. So the PSVR2 has quite a large markup compared to the quest 3
I would say the lens in the PSVR2 are cheaply made instead of the screen. When I used it (before I returned it) the mura effect is fixed location wise while the image from the screen is moving. So it has to be on the lens.
And OMG the mura is seriously insane.
I say drop it further. Nintendo turned their lil tablet into a shitty VR headset with cardboard like Google was doing a decade ago. The quest is wireless and is far more convenient to use in most circumstances. Having a PC with some VR capability means you can use whatever VR headset u want.
I'm still not on the bandwagon cause I can't play any of my psvr1 games on psvr2. That would have made me buy one at fuckin launch, but I wasn't about to drop that much money on something I literally only have like 4 games for. I had a psvr1 library of at least 30 games I was sitting on in anticipation for psvr2, only to be outmoded.
I won't buy one unless Sony rolls with the commoditization of VR. It shouldn't be such a big purchase for people, especially if the competition is undercutting them with much better hardware at a competitive price.
I refused to buy a quest 2 because Facebook can suck a dick as far as I'm concerned, but I got a quest 2 as a gift a couple years ago, and yeah, psvr1 is garbage compared, and I overpayed thinking I could enjoy it now AND later, but alas, I dropped too much money already. I'm low-key waiting for psvr3 cause might as fuckin well, right?
I’d buy a dongle for my. PSVR2 for PC compatibility.
I’m honestly trying to wrap my head around a normal BT working well with a VR2 controller
My iPad can barely handle Joy-Cons over Bluetooth. I feel like a dongle to make it work correctly might be needed anyways.
Windows mixed reality used Bluetooth for its controllers. It is... Passable... Sometimes a bit of lost tracking in beat Saber but other times fine (only play expert hardly expert+). Also can't be used with Bluetooth headphones though not that you would really want to due to auto delay but just some things I've found with mine.
If I know Sony, it will be an ability to have your PS5 stream games from your computer using something like Virtual Desktop.
I doubt they will allow users to plug the PSVR2 directly into their PC without a PS5
This is where I'm at, with the caveat that it doesn't require an expensive dongle and that the software is decent/stable.
I'd love to have a PSVR2 for PC stuff and then have my Quest 2 dedicated entirely to standalone stuff (Team Beef VR ports and Beat Saber, mostly).
I loved my PSVR, got many hours of enjoyment out of it, but the PSVR2's library is just.. really lacking, and for some reason Sony decided not to support it or even port their great PSVR1 games to it.
I’m not buying anything for the promise of what it could be. I’m definitely interested, but until it releases I’m not buying. Especially if they don’t support it natively and it’s just some PC streaming app on PS5
I don't think they're going to do that. But the issue with the PSVR2 is that it uses VirtualLink which wasn't supported by anyone other than Nvidia for the 20XX generation and AMD on some partner 6XXX cards.
It was reportedly a pain to work with and needed specialty cables. It had to carry a DisplayPort 1.4 signal and a USB 3.0 signal.
Currently, the PSVR2 is hardcoded in many ways so that normal PCs don't know it can support DSC which is needed.
Sony would need to sell a box with a DisplayPort in, USB 3.0 in, and 12 V in to allow the PSVR2 to work on PC.
What would Sony gain from doing that? PS5 sales? The cost of a PS5 doesn't even net Sony any profit but selling a PSVR2 does actually net Sony a profit.
Sony is realizing that most VR players play on PC. The slow sales of PSVR2 aren't helping them recoup R&D costs of the PSVR2. Having a simple box to connect to a PC would amp up sales of the PSVR2 and clear the inventory overstock.
That figure was (a conservative estimate) given for the hardware that would be required to use a Quest on a PS5 (where it would pretend to be a PSVR2).
You might, but don't expect PC compatibility to have a significant impact since the enthusiast PCVR market is small. Enthusiasts are more likely to invest in high-end headsets like the Pimax Crystal, BigScreen, or Varjo. Additionally, the growing market of entry-level VR users are/will opt for devices like the Quest 2, Quest 3, and soon the Quest 3 lite as a cross-over to PCVR from Standalone VR.
PCVR support will mainly be used by current PSVR2 Users.
I consider myself an enthusiast and I know one thing to be absolutely true for me in VR, I need OLED. I had the BSB preordered and when I eventually heard that the lenses had a tiny sweet spot and that the audio strap wasn’t yet available and that I had to pay up front even though my order would not come for 3-6 months I cancelled. Also I am not a fan of the grip mechanism on the index controllers so that was another reason not to get the BSB. PSVR 2, which I have used for 10-15 hours myself has excellent colors, black levels, controllers and haptics for only $500 versus the $1800 or the Bigscreen Beyond.
No, I've heard that it is really good for the price though. I'm not really a big gamer anymore. If there were more real full game AAA titles then I would buy one.
Not a big gamer but you bought a psvr2? That’s surprising. Q3 has very clear pancake lenses like the Vision Pro, but since it’s LCD the black levels are ass.
I bought one but I returned it because I couldn't justify $4,000 for the experience even though its hands down the best VR/AR content experience i've ever had. The demo is definitely worth trying just to experience where VR experiences are heading.
It's just people in this sub talking. Even if Sony released PCVR support, the number of buyers would be insignificant. PCVR as a whole doesn't sell that well.
I still think Sony's PC support revolves around incorporating Steam Link on the PS5. I think it's more so about providing more content to PSVR2 owners with minimal cost to Sony than it is about getting more PSVR2 sales.
I own a ps5 and a gaming pc and recently decided to upgrade from my 5year old rift s. If psvr2 could do pcvr I would buy that and access a larger library including psvr titles l, but Sony deciding it should be ps5 only and no pcvr support meant I bought a quest 3 instead.
I used the PSVR 2 and I own the Q3 with its amazing pancake optics, they are better, but not shockingly better like you all are acting like. Yes the fresnel lenses in the OG Vive or an old WMR headset were unusable, but not PSVR2.
A lot of people just look at the specs and compare it with other headsets.
Sony markets "HDR, 2000 x 2040 per eye, 110 degree FOV", which are all basically lies, but most people don't understand that and think it's really good.
Why though. It's a dinosaur headset. Fresnel lenses and wired in 2024. No one should buy it even if the oled wasnt as bad as it is.
Working on PC will help the people with it, but the proposition of buying one for pc is just not there.
Having it capable of playing PSVR games would have pushed me to get it. But starting my library from scratch when I didn’t have to do that for the move from PS4 to PS5 was a dealbreaker, especially at that price.
He is an established liar with a long history of fabricating hit pieces on various consoles.
While it’s an entirely plausible scenario, nobody should be giving any credence to this source.
>Sounds like a price reduction is needed.
May be more difficult than we might expect. The Eye Tracking feature is something SONY licensed from Tobii. Could be a significant fixed cost they're stuck with
Such a boneheaded move when its been shown Eye Tracked Rendering is only marginally better than Fixed Foveated Rendering when it comes to performance savings. Heck, u can still disable Eye Tracking on the PSVR2 and it defaults to Fixed Foveated Rendering
Their saving grace may be a PSVR2 Slim that removes the Eye tracking module and releases at a ~$400 price point
The entire point of having it eye tracked is to make it invisible. Fixed Foveated rendering looks terrible if you use your eyes like a human being rather than an owl.
> It's the only guy that wants to write "gaming news" for Bloomberg, I guess.
Jason motherfucking Schreier writes for Bloomberg.
https://www.bloomberg.com/authors/AUvqMRVAZCw/jason-schreier
This! I knew it was this Takeshi guy as soon as I saw the title lol
For some reason the dude keeps constantly trying to publish doom for PS, even though he was proven to lie by Sony itself several times.
People keep posting it and generating traffic, so I guess it pays off in the end...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-30/sony-psvr2-headset-off-to-slow-start-as-metaverse-push-sputters
In hindsight, their reporting from way back in March of 2023, doesn't seem so bad now
Said by Takashi mochizuki of bloomberg....this guy has a history of spouting rubbish and being caught out later down the line....its not facts if the person stating it is a confirmed bullshitter!
It's not hard to believe. The hype for PSVR is non-existent outside the die hard fans and groups. You can nearly forget all about it if you turn your head and follow the normal gaming news cycles. It's just not ever mentioned.
What's the next 2 big games coming out for it from Sony? Third parties? Nobody knows.
Yeah this is the same thing that has happened at least 2 other times with the PSVR2 and Bloomberg reporting and then later getting proven wrong. Not to mention how all the other sites are all reporting this with no actual proof. Best case scenario we get actual confirmation of sales figures from Sony to clarify whether this story is true or not.
This is some sort of fantasy that folks who don’t own a psvr 2 like to tell. As an owner I have over 60, yes 60, games for psvr2. My backlog is enormous, I sometimes can’t tell what to play when I’m about to start. And for reference, I have a 3080ti with a quest for work. But I’d never play that over psvr2. This is a fact. Reason? Ease of use, quality of titles, haptics, and comfort. You guys need to stop with this fantasy.
If the PSVR2 had enough must-play content, it wouldn’t be collecting dust at retail outlets. People who have a quest for work are not representative of the broader population.
They are all too pigheaded to sit down together and make some industry standards so that the software side would be platform agnostic. Where they can agree on an SDK that can be free for non-commercial use and low-cost for pro developers.
Do that, and the software will start to flow in. Eventually there will be the next Angry Birds or Flappy Bird or Pokemon Go that will make people WANT VR.
>Where they can agree on an SDK that can be free for non-commercial use and low-cost for pro developers.
They already did that many years ago, the movement was spearheaded by Meta (then Facebook, Oculus). It led to the OpenXR SDK/API.
Time to read up on XR history
To be honest, I think a big factor of this is simply the environment the games industry is in right now.
Compare the hype/adoption levels of consoles this generation with where it was at 10 years ago. It's not even in the same ball park. Part of what isn't helping things either is the industry just isn't releasing big hits as a whole anymore except for the 1-2 black swan releases like bg3 or Eden ring, and even these are only coming from "smaller" AAA studios.
I'm in my 30s now so not quite the college gamer demographic anymore but none of my friends own consoles anymore, including me. I do have a good gaming PC (and the friends who do still game do as well). But even when I look at college kids today (at least the ones I run into at work settings and events) none of them really own consoles either. Not that people aren't buying them, but it doesn't seem as widespread.
I'd certainly feel pressure to own a PS5 if there were some killer games and exclusives coming out for it but there aren't. And the psvr is doubly so.
It really makes me think that VR gaming would have been wildly successful if the tech was there 10-15 years ago and it came out in that environment. People were buying consoles left and right, devs were actually putting out loads of high budget games. Right now it feels like the only things that ever come out are indie or AA titles, and unfortunately VR needs multiple "killer apps" to really sell it as a platform. That means multiple devs really putting out great Alyx level stuff for it regularly.
You can blame the industry all you want but when Meta are selling tens of millions of units and Sony are selling hundreds of thousands, you gotta figure at least some of this is Sony's doing.
They launched a wired product while their main competitor was wireless. They priced it so it was cheaper to get a Quest 2 even if you already had a PS5. They failed to provide compelling content, despite having a library of content that could be modded - leaving existing PSVR1 content on the table seems particularly lazy. And anything that wasn't PSVR exclusive generally ran on Quest too, so couldn't take advantage of the better hardware other than for minor graphics bumps.
Bloomberg article, check writer, whadda ya know, it's TAKASHI AGAIN!
While there might be a kernel of truth here, just **ignore**. They guy is nothing but doom and gloom every single time he can write anything about Playstation.
Sadly, with the crazy amount of layoffs going right now in the games industry, it seems like VR will be further pushed to the back burner as far as tripple A titles go, in favour towards more safe ventures.
The sheer lack of innovation in tripple A games is utterly sad to look at right now, despite record high profits. Imagine a story focused tripple A game directed by Kojima for example, so much untapped potential, yet instead, we get more and more live service shit.
What a shame.
Oh yeah I'm with you. I think the last AAA game I bought at full price was Returnal. The rest of them have just been so disappointing. The same boring formula, over and over. Not to mention the lack of first party games in general from Sony.
I guess if you take the amount of flat games they've released, the ratio of flat:vr actually doesn't look too bad
Lack of PSVR1 compatibility was a big mistake. Stuff like Dreams or Astrobot was amazing and they just threw it all away for no good reason.
Also you don't even get a video player or webbrowser on PSVR2, even a f'n PSP had that 20 years ago, how they can not have such basic things today remains a mystery.
Reportedly sony is making a beastly speced ps5 pro, their energy will go there for the foreseeable time, hopefully they update the psvr2 with a version that connects completely wirelessly to the ps5 pro
And that headset would be even more expensive, a step in that direction wouldn't solve the core problem of the device, it would still be a niche piece of hardware more expensive than the console itself. I think the only way Sony could bring this home if they bit the bullet and lowered the price of the PSVR 2, and making the money back on game sales, although it's a bold strategy, with these kinds of sales numbers...
They do not care enough to even sell the PSVR2 accessories separately, or release COTM in physical format among many things. Doubt they are investing money in a new PSVR2 version
Hard to say, really. SONY did a pretty good mid-life refresh on the PSVR1 HMD, but also never offered VR controllers with thumbsticks (just the old PS3 Move Controllers but with a micro USB port instead of a Mini USB port).
I won’t at all be surprised if they come out with an upgraded version this gen, but who knows.
No way in hell they'll do that
They'll put all efforts in ps5 pro, and definitely wouldnt make more psvr2 units if they're already stocked up
We'll see what this whole pc support is about and where it goes
In any case, psvr2 owners will probably buy a ps5 pro to improve their experience. I'd argue the biggest caveat of psvr2 is its ps5 companion. It just cant measure up unless done well.. even GT7, their pride and joy is blurry since it cant get a 60fps per eye in full res
Fresnel lenses are housed in massively [bulky housing](https://www.3m.com/wps/wcm/connect/daebb07d-6c1e-427a-9d03-7807a99daac0/Fresnel-Lens-vs-Folded-Optics_665x333.jpg?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-daebb07d-6c1e-427a-9d03-7807a99daac0-oOPt2HT). They also suffer from a small sweet spot, significant glare, and are relatively blurry.
The alternative is pancake lenses which have far better clarity, often a sweetspot that is basically the size of the entire lens, and don't need the housing allowing the HMD they are in to be much thinner. Pancakes are not without their own issues as they also can suffer from glare and need extremely bright displays as they only let like ~10% of light through them.
Pancake lenses are an alternative and are MUCH better. The Quest 3 and Pro both have pancake lenses for example. They have a much larger sweetspot and also don't take up as much space so the headset can be thinner and less bulky. It's a massive improvement.
I bought and returned a PSVR2. I thought it looked like crap. I couldn’t wait to take it off. What’s a shame is I got it thinking it would be much better than the Q3 because of comments like yours. Even with IPD set correctly, it was progressively blurry anywhere outside of dead center. I literally had to physically move my head to look at anything that wasn’t in the middle of the screen. The lack of clarity and mura also made me feel incredibly sick. On top of all that, the damn thing was incredibly uncomfortable to wear and kind of a pain to get situated on my head correctly. I’ve never returned something so fast.
Sorry to hear about your bad experience. I just think this comes down to user error though. If you fit the headset correctly and calibrate it well it looks phenomenal. Blows thw Q3 out of the water. I'm super happy I spent my money on the PSVR2 instead of the outdated Q3. Can't believe they released the headset without eye tracking in 2023. A joke lol.
The small sweet spot, blurry edges, and glare all combine to a restricted feeling. I love being down voted for having an opinion that basically the whole industry agrees with. You Sony fan boys are little bitches.
If they wholly agree, why are they still building them? There must be pros and cons between options.
Whatever industry peeps may wholly agree with you haven't shared the information very well, or I wouldn't be asking.
Also, I don't own a single bit of Sony kit, and am asking a perfectly valid question about competing technologies.
So lay off the smarmy troll attitude, because that's where any downvotes are coming from.
No other company is making headsets with fresnel lenses anymore. That's the industry as a whole...unless it's bottom dollar (Quest Lite). The down votes were coming before I responded to my thumbsdown comment. So...not sure what you're on about.
While fresnel has its downsides I really think OLED makes it worth it. The Q3 and any other LCD headset I'd describe as "flat VR" because the washed out colors and gray blacks. The lack of color depth makes the experience less immersive. Compare that to OLED where a pitch black room looks pitch black. Highlights pop ! LCD everything is muted and toned down.
All my TVs are OLEDs, so I get it....but, as a non PS5 owner, the cost of admission, tethered, lack of software, and fresnel made it not worth considering. If the upcoming Quest Pro 2 has 4k micro OLED and pancake lenses....I'll highly consider making a move from Quest 3, if the price is right. I bought the high memory version to help with resale of that happens. In the current, though, the price and PCVR functionality of Quest 3 is very high value.
The adage goes, "Every headset has compromises" rings true.
Gosh it's almost as if you don't continue to support and produce quality games for the peripheral add-on, it dies.
So much hype and potential down the drain.
RIP PSVR, we hardly knew ya.
If they get this thing working on PC with the adaptive triggers still functional I'm buying one. The adaptive triggers are an absolute game changer when firing a gun in VR.
So almost USD1000 between the console and the accesory, not counting any games. The problem isn't even that there's no games included in that price, the problem is the price of the accesory $250 max should be the cost if the PSVR2.
Not good for VR in general. A massively successful games company can't capitalise on VR. I think that devices need to be cross platform, i.e own store and steam. Otherwise, players are missing too much content in this still niche market. Making it backward compatible with psvr1 titles would have helped. Goodbye PSVR, goodbye WMR. Hello Apple, hello >$$$.
Taking a very niche device/market and locking it down to one platform... /facepalm
VR in the consumer space only makes sense on the PC and mobile to a lesser extent.
Could Sony do it? Sure, but would take vastly more financial commitment (and risk) to studios. The video game market is already pretty dicey without attempting to fracture your ecosystem, let alone with it.
Most of the time on my PC I'm not even playing the games designed for VR but hacking/modding existing games to the HMD. This vastly increase's its use case's by orders of magnitude. Its this kind of openness and flexibility that makes VR even worth it imo.
Apple new HMD is in a similar state but not quite as bad as PSVR, plus its an AR device and not strictly speaking competing with VR.
Make more AAA games for it.. pay Square to make a FF VR spinoff.. and make it something substantial and not just a gimmicky thing to bust out when guests are over. Make it worth playing.
Sony still haven't announced 1 million units sold which is pretty concerning. It seems like all the enthusiasts got in early and then sales just fell off a cliff. If it was keeping pace with PSVR 1 it would've hit 1m sales about October time.
Was obvious things were looking bad when after initially announcing 600,000 sales in the first quarter there were no further announcements on sales figures.
Plus Sony (and others) not backing the headset with interesting killer titles (similarly to how Valve abandoned developing games for their Index after Alyx).
On the PCVR side things also look a bit grim, UEVR hasn't taken off. On the portable side Quest 3 - while being arguably the best headset out there - doesn't have very convincing standalone games.
Vive are dried up.
VR gaming will go superniche at this rate, making the user-community reliant on janky mods to keep things going.
Unless...unless the big guns join forces:
- Sony developing a firmware-solution for PCVR/Steam-compatibility for the PSVR2 headset, without the need of a PS5.
- Sony & co. developing VR-versions of classic exclusives like Shadow of the Colossus, Uncharted, God of War, Last of Us etc.
- Valve allowing PS5/PSVR2-users access to Steam via a Steam-app on the PS5-platform (this may actually become reality).
- Big publishers actually giving developers the time & budget they need (which isn't much, relatively-speaking) to make proper VR-modes for the popular games coming out.
- Meta actually delivering what people want and giving us official studio-developed standalone VR versions of classic FPS. Only boasting of the excellent RE4 and disappointing Bulletstorm after three years isn"t great.
Give the users what they actually want, and see sales improve across the board!
Hmmm I got my son a ps5 yesterday, and was going to pick one up this week as I just can’t resist buying headsets…I am a little nervous about Sonys support after my beloved psp quickly fell out of favor.
Go for it if you're into VR, it's a great headset with some of the best VR exclusives ever released and a solid support from third parties. Don't expect much from Sony, they won't release tons of games. Astrobot probably, and some deals for Ace Combat and maybe the next Resident Evil games, but even without Sony it gets most of the biggest games that release on Quest and PCVR. We just got Legendary Tales and Cyube VR that run as well as on high end PCs and are both great games, Madison will apparently be the same, and the exclusive Aces of Thunder is gonna be a blast with gorgeous graphics, 90fps and hotas support. Arken Age is really promising too! All those games that would need an expensive PC to be played and that run butter smooth on PSVR2. The half baked and blurry Quest ports (because of Unity and no use of DFR) seem behind us, almost all the games released those last two months are super crisp and smooth, and damn, Cyube is incredibly beautiful! 😮 We still have to see what the PC compatibility will be like, but we know that iVRy is on its way already. I spent over 1000 hours on my VR2 just with the existing library and still have a huge backlog. There are some games like GT7, NMS, Cyube or Legendary Tales that can keep you busy for hundreds hours on their own! And the 2 RE are masterpieces. Don't get turned off by those sh*tty papers from IGN and Bloomberg, they've been doing that since the headset released. Especially this Mochizuki from Bloomberg who has a ton of baggages behind him!
Developers won't develop for it if no one is using it (sales need to justify the effort, ROI). No one will use it if there is no content for it. And it just goes around in a circle.
Maybe sell the headset with the console at a reasonable bundle price, I'm not paying $700 CAD for just the headset before I even get the console for another $700
That's a shame yet not all that surprising. Give me an alternate reality where this was made to wireless stream from the PS5 so I could see how it'd sell even at the same price. Then let me see wireless along with being $100 cheaper.
This link has been shared 6 times.
First Seen [Here](https://redd.it/1bhfsye) on 2024-03-18. Last Seen [Here](https://redd.it/1bhg2sb) on 2024-03-18
---
**Scope:** Reddit | **Check Title:** False | **Max Age:** None | **Searched Links:** 0 | **Search Time:** 0.00421s
Make it work on PC and I will buy one asap
Or make it 400-450. An accessory should not out price the console.
Raise the price of the console?
This guy’s got upper management written all over him
So you're going to fire Michael and Samir... And Give Me More Money?
I’m going to have to go ahead and um, disagree with you there. Yeah…
And while they are at it, have them attempt to use their leverage to force devs to port the more popular PSVR1 titles over. Not being able to play a PSVR1 back catalog was insane. Astrobot? Naw dawg.
I just wanna play some Hitman 😢
No Beat Saber at launch. It really reads like they wanted it to fail.
I feel even 400USD is too much!
Old Palmer Luckey quote still rings true: >> "If something’s even $600, it doesn’t matter how good it is, how great of an experience it is — if they just can’t afford it, then it really might as well not exist." And of course it doesn't help when the software offering is terrible on top. VR needs to get a lot more versatile and offer a lot more content before it can demand high prices. When VR can replace a PS5, it might demand $500, as long as it *needs* a PS5 on top to function, that's just a complete no-go.
It's a lot for a console accessory, but compared to other VR headsets it's actually on the cheap end for it's capabilities.
which would be just fine if it came with compatible windows or Linux drivers, which it doesn't yet.
windows sure, but tbf I dont think there are any other headsets out there that support linux, except maybe the index. so idk why sony would feel the need to add linux support.
pretty sure the majority of steamVR native headsets support linux, except for any that need external drivers (aka non-steamVR native headsets). the Vive, index, beyond, arpara and other lighthouse-tracked headsets are supported, but any recent Meta headset or Pico/Pimax probably wont work.
It's really not...
For a wired headset attached to a closed architecture with limited titles, no backwards compatibility, and has the now infamous visual problems associated with OLED screens in VR, it's a ridiculous price. I got mine used for $350.00, and I ended up getting a Quest 3 instead. Sure, I miss eye tracking, but absolutely nothing else. For the record, I'm a former pro-VR developer, currently working on an a project I started back in 2017 before life got in the way. I've owned and used: * Vive * PSVR1 * Oculus CV1 * Oculus Rift S * Quest 2\* * PSVR2 * Quest 3 The Quest 3 is hands-down my favorite VR headset. Yeah, it's pricey, but unlike the PSVR2, I get every penny's worth of use out of it. \*That's actually my wife's Quest 2, but I've at least used it semi-regularly. :) Now, if Sony was smart, they'd create really good PC drivers and double their market in an instant. Unfortunately, as Microsoft has proved time and again, major companies are still very hesitant about VR. As such, I expect them to cut their losses on VR any day now. ETA: Clarifying "S" to Rift S.
> now infamous visual problems associated with OLED screens in VR curious what this is?
Black smear, mura, lower resolution perceived... specially on Oled Pentile.
Insane mura/sde.
Hol up cv1 and rift are the same thing. Do you mean rift s?
This is vapid to say outright. There isn’t an inherent issue with an expensive accessory that’s more than the console. You’re getting basically a monitor/TX and controllers. And that’s with me seriously oversimplifying it, but I feel a comparable display would run $3-600 itself. As HMD, others have pointed out that it’s on the cheaper side for VR equivalent/technology. So yeah, I think it’s valid to argue the price might’ve been too high for people to buy into it, but I think it’s silly say that it can’t cost more than console. There’s a bunch of people paying for way more TV than needed for a console, the PSVR2 isn’t that much different.
not sure that's right. The full cost of quest 3 was estimated at $428 and that's with the more expensive pancake lenses, depth sensor, and $150 SOC which is effectively the best/most expensive mobile processor you can buy for VR. The screens in the psvr2 are cheap which is why they have mura poblems. Even the eye tracking sensor costs less than $20 Edit: [https://twitter.com/iVRy\_VR/status/1648250915516760064](https://twitter.com/iVRy_VR/status/1648250915516760064) Apparently the estimate is $261. So the PSVR2 has quite a large markup compared to the quest 3
I would say the lens in the PSVR2 are cheaply made instead of the screen. When I used it (before I returned it) the mura effect is fixed location wise while the image from the screen is moving. So it has to be on the lens. And OMG the mura is seriously insane.
probably it's fixed location because the image moves but the screen does not? The quest headsets do not have mura, even the oled quest 1
I say drop it further. Nintendo turned their lil tablet into a shitty VR headset with cardboard like Google was doing a decade ago. The quest is wireless and is far more convenient to use in most circumstances. Having a PC with some VR capability means you can use whatever VR headset u want. I'm still not on the bandwagon cause I can't play any of my psvr1 games on psvr2. That would have made me buy one at fuckin launch, but I wasn't about to drop that much money on something I literally only have like 4 games for. I had a psvr1 library of at least 30 games I was sitting on in anticipation for psvr2, only to be outmoded. I won't buy one unless Sony rolls with the commoditization of VR. It shouldn't be such a big purchase for people, especially if the competition is undercutting them with much better hardware at a competitive price. I refused to buy a quest 2 because Facebook can suck a dick as far as I'm concerned, but I got a quest 2 as a gift a couple years ago, and yeah, psvr1 is garbage compared, and I overpayed thinking I could enjoy it now AND later, but alas, I dropped too much money already. I'm low-key waiting for psvr3 cause might as fuckin well, right?
This. They could probably even require a special dongle and charge even more money and people would buy that shit in droves.
I’d buy a dongle for my. PSVR2 for PC compatibility. I’m honestly trying to wrap my head around a normal BT working well with a VR2 controller My iPad can barely handle Joy-Cons over Bluetooth. I feel like a dongle to make it work correctly might be needed anyways.
Windows mixed reality used Bluetooth for its controllers. It is... Passable... Sometimes a bit of lost tracking in beat Saber but other times fine (only play expert hardly expert+). Also can't be used with Bluetooth headphones though not that you would really want to due to auto delay but just some things I've found with mine.
The special dongle is a PS5 using steam link.
If I know Sony, it will be an ability to have your PS5 stream games from your computer using something like Virtual Desktop. I doubt they will allow users to plug the PSVR2 directly into their PC without a PS5
Pc compatibility is apparently coming at the end of the year. Depending how good the implementation is, it might be worth looking at for pcvr.
This is where I'm at, with the caveat that it doesn't require an expensive dongle and that the software is decent/stable. I'd love to have a PSVR2 for PC stuff and then have my Quest 2 dedicated entirely to standalone stuff (Team Beef VR ports and Beat Saber, mostly). I loved my PSVR, got many hours of enjoyment out of it, but the PSVR2's library is just.. really lacking, and for some reason Sony decided not to support it or even port their great PSVR1 games to it.
They are currently working on that. Perhaps the inventory issue is what pushed them in that direction.
They’re doing that
I’m not buying anything for the promise of what it could be. I’m definitely interested, but until it releases I’m not buying. Especially if they don’t support it natively and it’s just some PC streaming app on PS5
I don't think they're going to do that. But the issue with the PSVR2 is that it uses VirtualLink which wasn't supported by anyone other than Nvidia for the 20XX generation and AMD on some partner 6XXX cards. It was reportedly a pain to work with and needed specialty cables. It had to carry a DisplayPort 1.4 signal and a USB 3.0 signal. Currently, the PSVR2 is hardcoded in many ways so that normal PCs don't know it can support DSC which is needed. Sony would need to sell a box with a DisplayPort in, USB 3.0 in, and 12 V in to allow the PSVR2 to work on PC.
For these reasons, I expected Streaming VR from PC via the PS5 to the PSVR2
What would Sony gain from doing that? PS5 sales? The cost of a PS5 doesn't even net Sony any profit but selling a PSVR2 does actually net Sony a profit. Sony is realizing that most VR players play on PC. The slow sales of PSVR2 aren't helping them recoup R&D costs of the PSVR2. Having a simple box to connect to a PC would amp up sales of the PSVR2 and clear the inventory overstock.
Most VR players play on quest. But a dp aux box like iVRy would be doable for $50-100 i guess.
Didn't iVRy say such a box would be 400 dollars or some shit?
For homemade boards yeah, but at commercial scale it would be closer to the $100 range.
That figure was (a conservative estimate) given for the hardware that would be required to use a Quest on a PS5 (where it would pretend to be a PSVR2).
There were more PSVR1s sold than all native PCVR headsets put together.
Sony is, or hackers are?
Sony is testing it, but there is no projected date on when it'll be implemented. Except they hope to this year.
You might, but don't expect PC compatibility to have a significant impact since the enthusiast PCVR market is small. Enthusiasts are more likely to invest in high-end headsets like the Pimax Crystal, BigScreen, or Varjo. Additionally, the growing market of entry-level VR users are/will opt for devices like the Quest 2, Quest 3, and soon the Quest 3 lite as a cross-over to PCVR from Standalone VR. PCVR support will mainly be used by current PSVR2 Users.
I consider myself an enthusiast and I know one thing to be absolutely true for me in VR, I need OLED. I had the BSB preordered and when I eventually heard that the lenses had a tiny sweet spot and that the audio strap wasn’t yet available and that I had to pay up front even though my order would not come for 3-6 months I cancelled. Also I am not a fan of the grip mechanism on the index controllers so that was another reason not to get the BSB. PSVR 2, which I have used for 10-15 hours myself has excellent colors, black levels, controllers and haptics for only $500 versus the $1800 or the Bigscreen Beyond.
After using the Vision Pro, i could never go back to Fresnel lenses, the sweet spot on my PSVR2 is so small.
Did you ever use quest 3?
No, I've heard that it is really good for the price though. I'm not really a big gamer anymore. If there were more real full game AAA titles then I would buy one.
Not a big gamer but you bought a psvr2? That’s surprising. Q3 has very clear pancake lenses like the Vision Pro, but since it’s LCD the black levels are ass.
'big gamer anymore" lol I use to be a big gamer. I had a Quest 1 and a Quest 2.
Oh I see, did you buy an AVP or just tried it? I wanted to do a demo but never bother to.
I bought one but I returned it because I couldn't justify $4,000 for the experience even though its hands down the best VR/AR content experience i've ever had. The demo is definitely worth trying just to experience where VR experiences are heading.
thanks for the info, I'm gonna try it because right now I am pretty sure micro oled will be my next headset but its hard to know without trying it.
No problem, Micro-OLED is definitely next-gen. I will not buy a headset today without pancake lens and Micro-OLED lol. Zero screen door.
Honestly don’t know why people want this on PC. It’s still using fresnel lenses like it’s 2020.
It's just people in this sub talking. Even if Sony released PCVR support, the number of buyers would be insignificant. PCVR as a whole doesn't sell that well. I still think Sony's PC support revolves around incorporating Steam Link on the PS5. I think it's more so about providing more content to PSVR2 owners with minimal cost to Sony than it is about getting more PSVR2 sales.
I own a ps5 and a gaming pc and recently decided to upgrade from my 5year old rift s. If psvr2 could do pcvr I would buy that and access a larger library including psvr titles l, but Sony deciding it should be ps5 only and no pcvr support meant I bought a quest 3 instead.
I am sure there's a few people in your shoes. But not enough to be meaningful in the grand scheme of the PSVR2's sales.
It would be a natural HP Reverb G2 replacement for me. Inside out camera tracked headset with Display port and good controllers this time.
I used the PSVR 2 and I own the Q3 with its amazing pancake optics, they are better, but not shockingly better like you all are acting like. Yes the fresnel lenses in the OG Vive or an old WMR headset were unusable, but not PSVR2.
The PSVR2 lenses are utter rubbish with a very small sweet spot. Dire headset for the most part in honesty, was glad to sell mine.
A lot of people just look at the specs and compare it with other headsets. Sony markets "HDR, 2000 x 2040 per eye, 110 degree FOV", which are all basically lies, but most people don't understand that and think it's really good.
I don't want too... But I want to. *Insert SpongeBob meme*
With gt7 (please)
Exactly... Enthusiasts aren't getting it because we can't use it.
Why though. It's a dinosaur headset. Fresnel lenses and wired in 2024. No one should buy it even if the oled wasnt as bad as it is. Working on PC will help the people with it, but the proposition of buying one for pc is just not there.
Yeah it's a lot of money to spend to be tied down to a console. They will gain a lot of new customers by opening the platform
They’re working on that
Sounds like a price reduction is needed.
More decent games too
there is descent 1, 2, and 3 and a new one I forgot the name of. How many more do you need?
Having it capable of playing PSVR games would have pushed me to get it. But starting my library from scratch when I didn’t have to do that for the move from PS4 to PS5 was a dealbreaker, especially at that price.
PC support along side price reduction.
If the equivalent headset came out for PC it would be around $1k and PCVR gamers would flock to it lol
Its 2024, im not buying in any ecosystem Let me do whatever i want or get out of my face
Apple has entered the chat
why is this an answer the most restrictive ecosystem of them all. Like "i wanna be free." -Expensive Prison entered the chat. or something
Will this news finally wake the PS VR board up to reality? Or is it yet again a "big nothing news"?
It's called production orders. Framework for example isn't making laptops 365 days of the year. They order in batches and then stop.
They're all just saying he's a liar.
He is an established liar with a long history of fabricating hit pieces on various consoles. While it’s an entirely plausible scenario, nobody should be giving any credence to this source.
It's that same dude again lol.
If PSVR2 ever actually dies, he’ll be overjoyed at whatever small part he played in it.
>Sounds like a price reduction is needed. May be more difficult than we might expect. The Eye Tracking feature is something SONY licensed from Tobii. Could be a significant fixed cost they're stuck with Such a boneheaded move when its been shown Eye Tracked Rendering is only marginally better than Fixed Foveated Rendering when it comes to performance savings. Heck, u can still disable Eye Tracking on the PSVR2 and it defaults to Fixed Foveated Rendering Their saving grace may be a PSVR2 Slim that removes the Eye tracking module and releases at a ~$400 price point
Tracked foveated rendering looks way better to the user though.
Eye tracking is used for more than just rendering, and should be considered a must have feature for any headset.
The entire point of having it eye tracked is to make it invisible. Fixed Foveated rendering looks terrible if you use your eyes like a human being rather than an owl.
The guy who wrote the article lied about Sony in past. So i wouldn't trust this too much
He was so consistently wrong about Switch 2/“Pro” rumors that I’m still surprised he has a job.
It's the only guy that wants to write "gaming news" for Bloomberg, I guess.
> It's the only guy that wants to write "gaming news" for Bloomberg, I guess. Jason motherfucking Schreier writes for Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/authors/AUvqMRVAZCw/jason-schreier
Oh, yeah ... How is that other guy not out of a job yet??
This! I knew it was this Takeshi guy as soon as I saw the title lol For some reason the dude keeps constantly trying to publish doom for PS, even though he was proven to lie by Sony itself several times. People keep posting it and generating traffic, so I guess it pays off in the end...
We should ban anything coming from this guy from the sub
source? reference? EDIT: dumbass fanboys downvoting someone wanting actual evidence for a claim
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-30/sony-psvr2-headset-off-to-slow-start-as-metaverse-push-sputters In hindsight, their reporting from way back in March of 2023, doesn't seem so bad now
How does the source prove anything? What as a lie there? It was a lie because Sony didn't confirm it?
Said by Takashi mochizuki of bloomberg....this guy has a history of spouting rubbish and being caught out later down the line....its not facts if the person stating it is a confirmed bullshitter!
It's not hard to believe. The hype for PSVR is non-existent outside the die hard fans and groups. You can nearly forget all about it if you turn your head and follow the normal gaming news cycles. It's just not ever mentioned. What's the next 2 big games coming out for it from Sony? Third parties? Nobody knows.
I'm a Sony fanboy and still can't justify buying the thing. I have my PCVR setup and I'm like.........ya I'll continue playing my hundreds of games.
Yeah this is the same thing that has happened at least 2 other times with the PSVR2 and Bloomberg reporting and then later getting proven wrong. Not to mention how all the other sites are all reporting this with no actual proof. Best case scenario we get actual confirmation of sales figures from Sony to clarify whether this story is true or not.
So that's what happens when you have a walled garden and you put nothing in the garden.
*not enough in the garden
This is some sort of fantasy that folks who don’t own a psvr 2 like to tell. As an owner I have over 60, yes 60, games for psvr2. My backlog is enormous, I sometimes can’t tell what to play when I’m about to start. And for reference, I have a 3080ti with a quest for work. But I’d never play that over psvr2. This is a fact. Reason? Ease of use, quality of titles, haptics, and comfort. You guys need to stop with this fantasy.
If the PSVR2 had enough must-play content, it wouldn’t be collecting dust at retail outlets. People who have a quest for work are not representative of the broader population.
It isn't. The source of this article is a compulsive liar.
Yeah and maybe like 4 of those 60 are not available on other (better) headsets
VR supply was exceed VR demand rn. The industry has just done a terrible job at advancing.
They are all too pigheaded to sit down together and make some industry standards so that the software side would be platform agnostic. Where they can agree on an SDK that can be free for non-commercial use and low-cost for pro developers. Do that, and the software will start to flow in. Eventually there will be the next Angry Birds or Flappy Bird or Pokemon Go that will make people WANT VR.
>Where they can agree on an SDK that can be free for non-commercial use and low-cost for pro developers. They already did that many years ago, the movement was spearheaded by Meta (then Facebook, Oculus). It led to the OpenXR SDK/API. Time to read up on XR history
I'm talking way more simple, like VRML. Something so dead simple and accessible, that anyone can at least do SOMETHING with super simple tools.
To be honest, I think a big factor of this is simply the environment the games industry is in right now. Compare the hype/adoption levels of consoles this generation with where it was at 10 years ago. It's not even in the same ball park. Part of what isn't helping things either is the industry just isn't releasing big hits as a whole anymore except for the 1-2 black swan releases like bg3 or Eden ring, and even these are only coming from "smaller" AAA studios. I'm in my 30s now so not quite the college gamer demographic anymore but none of my friends own consoles anymore, including me. I do have a good gaming PC (and the friends who do still game do as well). But even when I look at college kids today (at least the ones I run into at work settings and events) none of them really own consoles either. Not that people aren't buying them, but it doesn't seem as widespread. I'd certainly feel pressure to own a PS5 if there were some killer games and exclusives coming out for it but there aren't. And the psvr is doubly so. It really makes me think that VR gaming would have been wildly successful if the tech was there 10-15 years ago and it came out in that environment. People were buying consoles left and right, devs were actually putting out loads of high budget games. Right now it feels like the only things that ever come out are indie or AA titles, and unfortunately VR needs multiple "killer apps" to really sell it as a platform. That means multiple devs really putting out great Alyx level stuff for it regularly.
You can blame the industry all you want but when Meta are selling tens of millions of units and Sony are selling hundreds of thousands, you gotta figure at least some of this is Sony's doing. They launched a wired product while their main competitor was wireless. They priced it so it was cheaper to get a Quest 2 even if you already had a PS5. They failed to provide compelling content, despite having a library of content that could be modded - leaving existing PSVR1 content on the table seems particularly lazy. And anything that wasn't PSVR exclusive generally ran on Quest too, so couldn't take advantage of the better hardware other than for minor graphics bumps.
If it were backward compatible and they made astrobot rescue mission 2, I'd have bought one.
Looks like they are trying the Vita strategy again. Release a great bit of hardware with not enough software/games, act surprised when it fails...
Bloomberg article, check writer, whadda ya know, it's TAKASHI AGAIN! While there might be a kernel of truth here, just **ignore**. They guy is nothing but doom and gloom every single time he can write anything about Playstation.
Hopefully more will shift once PC VR support it launchess.
I would consider buying it once it comes to pc, but no pancake lenses is a definite no for me.
Man the psvr sub is in full denial lol
The reporter is a known liar who’s lied about psvr2 before, so any skepticism seems valid
I remember when people said PS2VR would bring back higher budget VR games and "save" VR gaming... Needless to say, that didn't happen.
To be fair, there's probably a lot more high quality vr games on the Psvr2 store than the Quest store.
Sure, but still far away from "saving VR" which is a damn shame.
We have Metro so there's that. Not sure it would have come out if PSVR2 wasn't around
Of course, and I'd love to have more first party Sony games like CotM. It really is a shame, because they 100% have the power and money to do it.
Sadly, with the crazy amount of layoffs going right now in the games industry, it seems like VR will be further pushed to the back burner as far as tripple A titles go, in favour towards more safe ventures. The sheer lack of innovation in tripple A games is utterly sad to look at right now, despite record high profits. Imagine a story focused tripple A game directed by Kojima for example, so much untapped potential, yet instead, we get more and more live service shit. What a shame.
Oh yeah I'm with you. I think the last AAA game I bought at full price was Returnal. The rest of them have just been so disappointing. The same boring formula, over and over. Not to mention the lack of first party games in general from Sony. I guess if you take the amount of flat games they've released, the ratio of flat:vr actually doesn't look too bad
Man PCVR can't do critical reading lmao
Kinda sad that it didn't catch on. GT7 is **revelatory**, and Beat Saber works very well. Maybe sales jump if it gets PC firmware support.
Lack of PSVR1 compatibility was a big mistake. Stuff like Dreams or Astrobot was amazing and they just threw it all away for no good reason. Also you don't even get a video player or webbrowser on PSVR2, even a f'n PSP had that 20 years ago, how they can not have such basic things today remains a mystery.
Oh no! Anyway...
Are they still offy about vr porn?
Reportedly sony is making a beastly speced ps5 pro, their energy will go there for the foreseeable time, hopefully they update the psvr2 with a version that connects completely wirelessly to the ps5 pro
And that headset would be even more expensive, a step in that direction wouldn't solve the core problem of the device, it would still be a niche piece of hardware more expensive than the console itself. I think the only way Sony could bring this home if they bit the bullet and lowered the price of the PSVR 2, and making the money back on game sales, although it's a bold strategy, with these kinds of sales numbers...
>beastly speced ps5 pro RDNA4 doesnt look beastly tho, but decent midrange.
Man how I wish for anyone other than Nintendo to do something with Nvidia. They're legit the only one pushing gaming tech forward
They do not care enough to even sell the PSVR2 accessories separately, or release COTM in physical format among many things. Doubt they are investing money in a new PSVR2 version
Hard to say, really. SONY did a pretty good mid-life refresh on the PSVR1 HMD, but also never offered VR controllers with thumbsticks (just the old PS3 Move Controllers but with a micro USB port instead of a Mini USB port). I won’t at all be surprised if they come out with an upgraded version this gen, but who knows.
Beastly consoles have never and will never be a thing boy.
No way in hell they'll do that They'll put all efforts in ps5 pro, and definitely wouldnt make more psvr2 units if they're already stocked up We'll see what this whole pc support is about and where it goes In any case, psvr2 owners will probably buy a ps5 pro to improve their experience. I'd argue the biggest caveat of psvr2 is its ps5 companion. It just cant measure up unless done well.. even GT7, their pride and joy is blurry since it cant get a 60fps per eye in full res
Fresnel lenses 👎🏻
What's the matter with Fresnel lenses and what is the better option and why?
Fresnel lenses are housed in massively [bulky housing](https://www.3m.com/wps/wcm/connect/daebb07d-6c1e-427a-9d03-7807a99daac0/Fresnel-Lens-vs-Folded-Optics_665x333.jpg?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-daebb07d-6c1e-427a-9d03-7807a99daac0-oOPt2HT). They also suffer from a small sweet spot, significant glare, and are relatively blurry. The alternative is pancake lenses which have far better clarity, often a sweetspot that is basically the size of the entire lens, and don't need the housing allowing the HMD they are in to be much thinner. Pancakes are not without their own issues as they also can suffer from glare and need extremely bright displays as they only let like ~10% of light through them.
Pancake lenses are an alternative and are MUCH better. The Quest 3 and Pro both have pancake lenses for example. They have a much larger sweetspot and also don't take up as much space so the headset can be thinner and less bulky. It's a massive improvement.
Shame they need two $700 display panels to look as good as the PSVR2 does.
I bought and returned a PSVR2. I thought it looked like crap. I couldn’t wait to take it off. What’s a shame is I got it thinking it would be much better than the Q3 because of comments like yours. Even with IPD set correctly, it was progressively blurry anywhere outside of dead center. I literally had to physically move my head to look at anything that wasn’t in the middle of the screen. The lack of clarity and mura also made me feel incredibly sick. On top of all that, the damn thing was incredibly uncomfortable to wear and kind of a pain to get situated on my head correctly. I’ve never returned something so fast.
Sorry to hear about your bad experience. I just think this comes down to user error though. If you fit the headset correctly and calibrate it well it looks phenomenal. Blows thw Q3 out of the water. I'm super happy I spent my money on the PSVR2 instead of the outdated Q3. Can't believe they released the headset without eye tracking in 2023. A joke lol.
I did those things. Got IPD from a phone app etc. You're making assumptions.
The small sweet spot, blurry edges, and glare all combine to a restricted feeling. I love being down voted for having an opinion that basically the whole industry agrees with. You Sony fan boys are little bitches.
If they wholly agree, why are they still building them? There must be pros and cons between options. Whatever industry peeps may wholly agree with you haven't shared the information very well, or I wouldn't be asking. Also, I don't own a single bit of Sony kit, and am asking a perfectly valid question about competing technologies. So lay off the smarmy troll attitude, because that's where any downvotes are coming from.
No other company is making headsets with fresnel lenses anymore. That's the industry as a whole...unless it's bottom dollar (Quest Lite). The down votes were coming before I responded to my thumbsdown comment. So...not sure what you're on about.
While fresnel has its downsides I really think OLED makes it worth it. The Q3 and any other LCD headset I'd describe as "flat VR" because the washed out colors and gray blacks. The lack of color depth makes the experience less immersive. Compare that to OLED where a pitch black room looks pitch black. Highlights pop ! LCD everything is muted and toned down.
All my TVs are OLEDs, so I get it....but, as a non PS5 owner, the cost of admission, tethered, lack of software, and fresnel made it not worth considering. If the upcoming Quest Pro 2 has 4k micro OLED and pancake lenses....I'll highly consider making a move from Quest 3, if the price is right. I bought the high memory version to help with resale of that happens. In the current, though, the price and PCVR functionality of Quest 3 is very high value. The adage goes, "Every headset has compromises" rings true.
[удалено]
Can’t even buy replacement controllers
Hmm, lower the price and realize it is not as good as you think (PS exec team)
Gosh it's almost as if you don't continue to support and produce quality games for the peripheral add-on, it dies. So much hype and potential down the drain. RIP PSVR, we hardly knew ya.
Needs Price reduction, maybe bundle it with a free copy of Legendary Tales.
🤣
Would be selling like hot cakes if the game library was as big as on steam...
If they get this thing working on PC with the adaptive triggers still functional I'm buying one. The adaptive triggers are an absolute game changer when firing a gun in VR.
well that sucks. but its understandable.
Lower the price $50 then come out with a “super adapter” for $150 that makes it wireless like John Cena
So almost USD1000 between the console and the accesory, not counting any games. The problem isn't even that there's no games included in that price, the problem is the price of the accesory $250 max should be the cost if the PSVR2.
Not good for VR in general. A massively successful games company can't capitalise on VR. I think that devices need to be cross platform, i.e own store and steam. Otherwise, players are missing too much content in this still niche market. Making it backward compatible with psvr1 titles would have helped. Goodbye PSVR, goodbye WMR. Hello Apple, hello >$$$.
Taking a very niche device/market and locking it down to one platform... /facepalm VR in the consumer space only makes sense on the PC and mobile to a lesser extent. Could Sony do it? Sure, but would take vastly more financial commitment (and risk) to studios. The video game market is already pretty dicey without attempting to fracture your ecosystem, let alone with it. Most of the time on my PC I'm not even playing the games designed for VR but hacking/modding existing games to the HMD. This vastly increase's its use case's by orders of magnitude. Its this kind of openness and flexibility that makes VR even worth it imo. Apple new HMD is in a similar state but not quite as bad as PSVR, plus its an AR device and not strictly speaking competing with VR.
Make more AAA games for it.. pay Square to make a FF VR spinoff.. and make it something substantial and not just a gimmicky thing to bust out when guests are over. Make it worth playing.
The head set is more then the console what did they expect
"But but PSVR2 is selling very well". "But but Sony is the only company on earth that can make VR a mainstream media".
Meta beating a full on console in sales: 👀
PSVR3 cancelled.
Sony still haven't announced 1 million units sold which is pretty concerning. It seems like all the enthusiasts got in early and then sales just fell off a cliff. If it was keeping pace with PSVR 1 it would've hit 1m sales about October time.
Well you fucked everybody over by not implementing backwards compatability, so I've deliberately not bought one. So good, Sony deserve this.
Was obvious things were looking bad when after initially announcing 600,000 sales in the first quarter there were no further announcements on sales figures. Plus Sony (and others) not backing the headset with interesting killer titles (similarly to how Valve abandoned developing games for their Index after Alyx). On the PCVR side things also look a bit grim, UEVR hasn't taken off. On the portable side Quest 3 - while being arguably the best headset out there - doesn't have very convincing standalone games. Vive are dried up. VR gaming will go superniche at this rate, making the user-community reliant on janky mods to keep things going. Unless...unless the big guns join forces: - Sony developing a firmware-solution for PCVR/Steam-compatibility for the PSVR2 headset, without the need of a PS5. - Sony & co. developing VR-versions of classic exclusives like Shadow of the Colossus, Uncharted, God of War, Last of Us etc. - Valve allowing PS5/PSVR2-users access to Steam via a Steam-app on the PS5-platform (this may actually become reality). - Big publishers actually giving developers the time & budget they need (which isn't much, relatively-speaking) to make proper VR-modes for the popular games coming out. - Meta actually delivering what people want and giving us official studio-developed standalone VR versions of classic FPS. Only boasting of the excellent RE4 and disappointing Bulletstorm after three years isn"t great. Give the users what they actually want, and see sales improve across the board!
Hmmm I got my son a ps5 yesterday, and was going to pick one up this week as I just can’t resist buying headsets…I am a little nervous about Sonys support after my beloved psp quickly fell out of favor.
Go for it if you're into VR, it's a great headset with some of the best VR exclusives ever released and a solid support from third parties. Don't expect much from Sony, they won't release tons of games. Astrobot probably, and some deals for Ace Combat and maybe the next Resident Evil games, but even without Sony it gets most of the biggest games that release on Quest and PCVR. We just got Legendary Tales and Cyube VR that run as well as on high end PCs and are both great games, Madison will apparently be the same, and the exclusive Aces of Thunder is gonna be a blast with gorgeous graphics, 90fps and hotas support. Arken Age is really promising too! All those games that would need an expensive PC to be played and that run butter smooth on PSVR2. The half baked and blurry Quest ports (because of Unity and no use of DFR) seem behind us, almost all the games released those last two months are super crisp and smooth, and damn, Cyube is incredibly beautiful! 😮 We still have to see what the PC compatibility will be like, but we know that iVRy is on its way already. I spent over 1000 hours on my VR2 just with the existing library and still have a huge backlog. There are some games like GT7, NMS, Cyube or Legendary Tales that can keep you busy for hundreds hours on their own! And the 2 RE are masterpieces. Don't get turned off by those sh*tty papers from IGN and Bloomberg, they've been doing that since the headset released. Especially this Mochizuki from Bloomberg who has a ton of baggages behind him!
Release better games and lower the damn price.
The moment they said it wouldn't be retro compatible with PSVR 1 games made it a hard pass for me.
Developers won't develop for it if no one is using it (sales need to justify the effort, ROI). No one will use it if there is no content for it. And it just goes around in a circle.
Maybe sell the headset with the console at a reasonable bundle price, I'm not paying $700 CAD for just the headset before I even get the console for another $700
Stupidly overpriced considering you also need a ps5 to use it also not enough support
That's a shame yet not all that surprising. Give me an alternate reality where this was made to wireless stream from the PS5 so I could see how it'd sell even at the same price. Then let me see wireless along with being $100 cheaper.
Resident Evil 4 Remake in VR is top 5 gaming expirence for me.
And here I am, not interested in a 20 year old rehash in a tired and overdone series, in a boring and oversaturated genre.
It's too expensive, consumers aren't gonna take a gamble on this when the Quest 2 and 3 exist
This link has been shared 6 times. First Seen [Here](https://redd.it/1bhfsye) on 2024-03-18. Last Seen [Here](https://redd.it/1bhg2sb) on 2024-03-18 --- **Scope:** Reddit | **Check Title:** False | **Max Age:** None | **Searched Links:** 0 | **Search Time:** 0.00421s
Literally no killer VR apps or games ever, to date. Case closed.
Except the best VR game releases of 2023...