Look at PS VR Graphic King #SONYDOMINATION

That looks fun.

LOL!

PSVR target is 60 fps. To make vr work re projection is on all the time which then up scales head tracking to 120hz. With 60fps games like SW:BF, Project Cars, MGS5, COD multiplayer, Fifa, PES, f**kin Journey, Flower I don't know lol. I believe the minimum for oculus is 90fps. What I'm getting at is basically you have something to work with. For even more headroom for those games trying to hold on to gfx fidelity. BF you can cut players to 20 instead of 40 lower the high settings to medium. Dice really wanted fidelity over resolution they kept some of the console settings really high. Project Cars you can reduce the number of cars to 16 and what not. Reduce fidelity to wiiU level even. So far people who have tried games like Rigs, Eve Valkyrie seems to be working fine. PSVR will just be what it is, The only console vr experience available. Less fps less visual detail compare to the pc.

Also for people who own entry level vr ready pcs, be prepared for sacrifices of your own. Either you or the devs. You will not be suddenly running things at max settings 120fps.

@dynamitecop: Regarding evolution your kinda answering yourself here. Again it will be evolving at the same old console level pace. The display is already ahead of the ps4 so the experience will get better when say ps5 comes along. I doubt that ps5 will be pushing total resolutions beyond 1080p while keeping the bump in visual fidelity any time soon. If its truly successful it will evolve around PlayStation.

NO is the experience which is why i don't care for it,fact is you will never get graphics as good on VR as you will on normal games and that apply to PC as well,sure a 970GTX can pump better visuals than the PS4,but will not pump better visuals and than 970gtx running a normal game just like like on PS4 you can't Uncharted 4 like graphics on VR the same hit to performance also apply on PC so those cards will never look as good on VR as they will on non VR games.

Reprojection?

In fact the minimum the game can be is 60FPS.

If you ask me this is ^^ at least a very real shot at making something standard sony already is stating at this GDC that the game need to be 60FPS or they will reject it,that is far better if you ask me than what you will get on PC,considering that even if you own a 970gtz not all games will work best on that card,and that happen to AMD as well,on PC most of the game run better on 1 hardware than in another specially if gameworks is in play so we are talking about getting the game playable in good shape on a 970gtx but on AMD side the game could run much slower and have problems,on PS4 this isn't a problem because there is 1 hardware period.

VR is destine to fail in both PC and consoles and in a few years it would be another one of those gimmicks that time forgot.

Pretty sure Eve Valkyrie was not running smoothly on Morpheus, at least that's what the preview said that Shewgenja posted sometime back. What will come back to haunt Sony is the same marketing tactics they are trying to hype \psvr with games like SW:BF and Robinson: the Journey. People see the initial trailers in very high fidelity graphics and in the case of SW:BF will be expecting the same level o fidelity as with the traditional version and when they end up with nothing like that, Sony would have successfully poisoned the water with their sub par VR.

I'm not sure vr will fail. If anything it's more likely to succeed on console instead of pc

Where the hell is everyone getting SW:Battlefront is coming to PSVR? Its been stated that it'll be an SW:BF experience not the actual base SW:BF game

@tormentos said:

@dynamitecop said:

@quadknight said:

graphics are not what makes a compelling VR experience.

Graphics are fundamentally the most important part of VR moving forward.

NO is the experience which is why i don't care for it,fact is you will never get graphics as good on VR as you will on normal games and that apply to PC as well,sure a 970GTX can pump better visuals than the PS4,but will not pump better visuals and than 970gtx running a normal game just like like on PS4 you can't Uncharted 4 like graphics on VR the same hit to performance also apply on PC so those cards will never look as good on VR as they will on non VR games.

@zeeshanhaider said:

Okay...!!! Then try and explain SW:BF on PSVR. The game currently is 900p and 60 FPS on 900pStation, what will suddenly make it run at 120 FPS and full HD on PSVR, magic?

Reprojection?

In fact the minimum the game can be is 60FPS.

If you ask me this is ^^ at least a very real shot at making something standard sony already is stating at this GDC that the game need to be 60FPS or they will reject it,that is far better if you ask me than what you will get on PC,considering that even if you own a 970gtz not all games will work best on that card,and that happen to AMD as well,on PC most of the game run better on 1 hardware than in another specially if gameworks is in play so we are talking about getting the game playable in good shape on a 970gtx but on AMD side the game could run much slower and have problems,on PS4 this isn't a problem because there is 1 hardware period.

VR is destine to fail in both PC and consoles and in a few years it would be another one of those gimmicks that time forgot.

lol 900pStation and it's fake VR. For 500$ you get reprojection.

I was listening to a giant bomb pod cast talking about psvr at the latest psx 2015, so maybe as development progressed it improved since the Morpheus days. Its really hard to get a sense if it will all work until we tried it ourselves I guess. My point is people should be lowering the requirement for psvr like don't think in the vain of 120fps, there is just no way that's achievable lol. But also don't go to far off 60fps cut back experience should work. We don't know what that BF experience going to be like but we shall see. All you can do is try to deduct what we have to work with.

Me with my R9 290x I just make the cut with Oculus and I'm anticipating having to lower my standard a bit as the requirement is higher.

@jhonMalcovich: Not even the best looking game on PSVR.

All the bitching about the thread I made about PC gaming and you hermits are all bashing a product who's makers even said themselves would be less quality bc it is less money.

When you get all the stuff you need it's not that much cheaper in all reality, for me personally working a few extra hours makes up the price difference between PSVR and the Rift, and one full day between the cost of PSVR and the Vive...

This is the financial breakdown as it stands for me with all tax and devices included, the difference between PSVR and the Vive for me is an 8 hour shift...

• 2.06 days of work to afford PSVR
• 2.22 days of work to afford Rift
• 3.06 days of work to afford Vive

@dynamitecop: It's ok NyaDC you can stop pretending, we know it's you. You can stop posting with your alt.

This VR pos looks incredibly dull

That's true. I hope Sony knows that to sell the system you need kilelr apps and PS2 type games arent going to do it.

@dynamitecop: you forgot the behemoth of a PC required for the Rift and Vive.

Total costs is what I'm talking.

I've already been over that, most people in a position of interest for VR in the PC space already have a PC capable of handling it or were planning on upgrading regardless to keep up with the times and advances in gaming technology. For those people VR may move their upgrade date a bit forward, but it's already a calculated cost for most that they were going to upgrade regardless of VR existing or not.

All you're using that viewpoint for is to make PSVR seem more desirable by introducing a scapegoat because the hardware it is connected to is cheaper. My PC is VR ready as it stands right now and I am still going to upgrade regardless of getting a Vive or not, you seem to forget how multifaceted of a device a PC is and that its main use is still going to be general purpose gaming.

Where are you pulling that information from? There is no way knowing any of that,. My PC is from 2009 and I have no desire to upgrade for Rift and I'm pretty sure it wouldn't handle it very well now with only a 7950 and 8gb of DDR2 ram.

"most people"

"planning on upgrading regardless to keep up with the times and advances in gaming technology"

"may move their upgrade date a bit forward"

You're going to upgrade your PC though no doubt, maybe not for this but if you're a PC gamer you're going to do it regardless if you have interest in staying in the market, it's a calculated cost.

You have no way of knowing that, even using those words. My pc has lasted me 7 years and by the time I upgrade 7 years. I see people who want a game or in this case VR, but Rift, in my opinion, isn't going to make people rush out and upgrade there PC's for it. For one the cost of just the PC hardware, then you have the high cost of Rift which is $600with little to no killer games that use it. Same reason I dont think the PVR wont take off, cost and no killer apps.

I'll upgrade my PC next year, but not for VR.

@dynamitecop: fact is the machines that you need for these VR devices cost money...and therefore factor in.

Even if you bought a super computer yesterday not knowing about Rift or Vive you bought those specs with the notion that your new PC is as future proof as it can be. That therefore includes new tech...like the Rift and Vive.

That's my exact point, it's a calculated cost, most who PC game are either in this position already or will be through the natural order of upgrading their hardware to continue PC gaming and as a result will be in a position to handle VR if they so choose.

It's an already accounted for and calculated cost associated with being a PC gamer.

above

Xbox game comes out, cows bash graphics

Ps4 shitty VR game comes out on ps4 - bbbbbut graphics don't matter!!!1

Well I dont think we're on the same page then. I'm not upgrading my PC for Rift and no plans to ever buy it. Those who have machines that can currently use it still have a steep price to get the hardware itself, then you have no killer apps, iin my opinion to use with it.

If you dont have a PC, than yeah, you need that extra cost as well. Maybe another $1000?

Read what I am saying, I'm not saying you're upgrading for VR, you're upgrading for the sake of upgrading so you can continue gaming on your PC, as a result your PC will become VR ready, that is the natural order for PC gaming.

Someone jumping on the VR train who isn't a PC gamer and doesn't have a PC already has to be in the sub, sub, sub 1 percentile. It's going to be hard enough getting PC gamers to adopt $700 and $900 device costs in a market they are heavily invested in already let alone $2,000+ for people who don't even use a PC for gaming..

That was my point all along. The price for what you currently get as far as games is pretty slim right now, not to mention the quality of those games. Hopefully it gets better but in Sony's case the PS4 is locked in for hardware.

@dynamitecop: you're still missing the point. My upgrade cost me $400. Your upgrade I'm sure cost much more.

Yeah, because I buy high end hardware, I'm not upgrading for VR, I already hit the very high qualification for it, so what's your point?

Well, that was depressing.

@dynamitecop: I don't care why....not the point.