The false information and overall lack of knowledge regarding PSVR on this board is alarming. The external box serves the purpose of computing the 3D sound and generating a 2D image of what the player with the headset on is doing and sending that output to a television. It's not some PlayStation 32X or anything like that.
Wouldn't the box have served more purpose if it were to have been used to beef up the processing of the PS4 itself, even if just for VR games? I'm certainly not going to claim any VR knowledge here, but I'm assuming that each screen on the headset will need it's own seperate rendering done, and assuming that the screens are 1080p, it would seem as if the PS4 is going to have be doing double the work in order to push 2 individual screens worth of data. Would make sense if this new box were something to add more 'juice' to the processing power to push adequate frames to the headset.
Once again, just guessing here as I've no clue what the resolution is going to be on the headset, or even if it's aiming for dual 1080p/60.
This thing is going to be a PR and marketing nightmare...
Also the PlayStation 4 not being powerful enough goes without saying.
This is what's needed for X1 to handle VR.
No one is talking about the Xbox One, stop trying to pathetically divert attention from the reality of my statement and the PlayStation 4 being too weak to handle VR.
P.S. Microsoft was smart enough to not even attempt this as no current console is capable of handling it, and it is a collosal waste of company funds on a product that will have a non-existent consumer base.
Sony is recklessly putting the entire PlayStation division in jeopardy with this conceptually and fundamentally flawed and idiotic attempt at PC technology on a potato, they can't afford mistakes like this.
@ten_pints: "This is not news, it's been known for some time that the "box" will process both the video output and sensor inputs. It's been stated before it will also do interpolation to push low frame rates to higher frame rates for stuff that is below 90FPS. It will not process 3D stuff."
Agreed, this is old news to anyone actually following VR. Knew about the external hardware ages ago.
@getyeryayasout: "Early previews have been extremely positive, I don't understand all the negativity toward VR."
It's a combination of trolls and half glass empty pessimistic individuals, most of which don't bother educating themselves on the subject of VR.
Exactly. This was known almost (and maybe over) a year ago. I've been typing "breakout box" here on SW forever but SW doesn't listen unless you shout or call them by their animal names.
And this box doesn't make a PS4 turn into a 970/980. It handles reprojection and unwarping ("unprojection?") to display the VR image onto a TV screen. Other people in the living room can watch or even participate in certain VR games. The breakout box is not a miracle muscle processor that will make future 2D PS4 games do 1080p/60fps.
People have been complaining that VR is too isolating so Sony is letting others see and play with those in VR, depending on the game. It's like Nintendo with their Wii U Gamepad experiences, only Sony won't be as annoying about it, telling you the living room is the best way to play multiplayer.
"It's a combination of trolls and half glass empty pessimistic individuals, most of which don't bother educating themselves on the subject of VR."
I go to various forums and Gamespot's SW has some of the biggest VR noobs (and horrible predictors) I've ever seen. The place is infected with fanboys. You look for moderate viewpoints and get sickening hyperbole every time.
These are the same people who said developers would move to the Wii U because it was cheaper, the X1 and Wii U would make a comback, the PS4 would fail, Sony would go out of business this gen, the PS4 hype bubble would burst, and SteamMachines would take over console sales.
And now we have to listen to their definitive words about VR when they never tried it and can't make a good prediction about their own companies.
This thing is going to be a PR and marketing nightmare...
Also the PlayStation 4 not being powerful enough goes without saying.
This is what's needed for X1 to handle VR.
No one is talking about the Xbox One, stop trying to pathetically divert attention from the reality of my statement and the PlayStation 4 being too weak to handle VR.
P.S. Microsoft was smart enough to not even attempt this as no current console is capable of handling it, and it is a collosal waste of company funds on a product that will have a non-existent consumer base.
Sony is recklessly putting the entire PlayStation division in jeopardy with this conceptually and fundamentally flawed and idiotic attempt at PC technology on a potato, they can't afford mistakes like this.
LOL this fanboy. Microsoft was smart enough to not even attempt this?? You mean their pathetic answer to the Project Morpheus unveil when they rushed to the podium to announce their partnership with oculus because they had nothing?
You don't seem to understand. PSVR has been around for a year now for people to try out. It works, and it's a solid experience. Games for PSVR will obviously be scaled back to achieve the fundamental minimum requirements to deliver a smooth and pleasant VR experience. Devs aren't going to release games that run at 24 fps and blame the "potato" they had to develop on. Do you get it?
It all depends on the price. If the cost is anything more than 200-250$ I think it'll fail. I don't really expect mainstream gamers buying a peripheral at almost the same cost as the console itself. Then again, I could be wrong...
This thing is going to be a PR and marketing nightmare...
Also the PlayStation 4 not being powerful enough goes without saying.
This is what's needed for X1 to handle VR.
No one is talking about the Xbox One, stop trying to pathetically divert attention from the reality of my statement and the PlayStation 4 being too weak to handle VR.
P.S. Microsoft was smart enough to not even attempt this as no current console is capable of handling it, and it is a collosal waste of company funds on a product that will have a non-existent consumer base.
Sony is recklessly putting the entire PlayStation division in jeopardy with this conceptually and fundamentally flawed and idiotic attempt at PC technology on a potato, they can't afford mistakes like this.
LOL this fanboy. Microsoft was smart enough to not even attempt this?? You mean their pathetic answer to the Project Morpheus unveil when they rushed to the podium to announce their partnership with oculus because they had nothing?
You don't seem to understand. PSVR has been around for a year now for people to try out. It works, and it's a solid experience. Games for PSVR will obviously be scaled back to achieve the fundamental minimum requirements to deliver a smooth and pleasant VR experience. Devs aren't going to release games that run at 24 fps and blame the "potato" they had to develop on. Do you get it?
@ten_pints: "This is not news, it's been known for some time that the "box" will process both the video output and sensor inputs. It's been stated before it will also do interpolation to push low frame rates to higher frame rates for stuff that is below 90FPS. It will not process 3D stuff."
Agreed, this is old news to anyone actually following VR. Knew about the external hardware ages ago.
@getyeryayasout: "Early previews have been extremely positive, I don't understand all the negativity toward VR."
It's a combination of trolls and half glass empty pessimistic individuals, most of which don't bother educating themselves on the subject of VR.
Exactly. This was known almost (and maybe over) a year ago. I've been typing "breakout box" here on SW forever but SW doesn't listen unless you shout or call them by their animal names.
And this box doesn't make a PS4 turn into a 970/980. It handles reprojection and unwarping ("unprojection?") to display the VR image onto a TV screen. Other people in the living room can watch or even participate in certain VR games. The breakout box is not a miracle muscle processor that will make future 2D PS4 games do 1080p/60fps.
People have been complaining that VR is too isolating so Sony is letting others see and play with those in VR, depending on the game. It's like Nintendo with their Wii U Gamepad experiences, only Sony won't be as annoying about it, telling you the living room is the best way to play multiplayer.
Loading Video...
"It's a combination of trolls and half glass empty pessimistic individuals, most of which don't bother educating themselves on the subject of VR."
I go to various forums and Gamespot's SW has some of the biggest VR noobs (and horrible predictors) I've ever seen. The place is infected with fanboys. You look for moderate viewpoints and get sickening hyperbole every time.
These are the same people who said developers would move to the Wii U because it was cheaper, the X1 and Wii U would make a comback, the PS4 would fail, Sony would go out of business this gen, the PS4 hype bubble would burst, and SteamMachines would take over console sales.
And now we have to listen to their definitive words about VR when they never tried it and can't make a good prediction about their own companies.
I'm actually glad they are using additional hardware for the VR experience, the last thing I would want is to have to compromise on the graphics. For example, 3D on Gran Turismo 5/6 causes the game to drop the resolution down to 720p to accomodate 3D.
Also while this is completely optional, I think it will work in the market, I'm looking forward to the whole VR era and I wouldn't mind shelling out another $300-$400 for a completely immersive experience that will change the way I game for the remaining life of the playstation.
xD People actually think Char is attacking Sony with this thread? Jesus, Sony fans, chill. He merely stated the fact that PS4 isn't powerful enough and needs more power to run VR. Oh noes, somebody stop Char's hating on PS4 already! LMFAO
@nyadc: Well, jokes on you if you haven't seen my previous posts in this thread. The Gear VR, which is based on a smartphone, can't stay on the shelves right now in the US and Europe.
Unless you feel like building a compelling case for how my Galaxy Note 5 is more powerful than a PS4, it sounds like you don't know what the Sam **** you're talking about.
Few are naysaying VR, nearly everyone is naysaying Sony's idiotic attempt at it on an extremely weak closed source console, as they should be...
WTF now this is truly pathetic.
WTF make you think that if a R265 like GPU inside the PS4 can't handle it,the majority of PC gamers will even have a half baked experience as the PS4,news freaking flash. Most PC gamers don't even own a GPU as powerful as the PS4,that is the reality on PC the majority of gamers are under PS4 levels of graphics that is a FACT not my opinion sure there are more powerful ones but those are a minority the 600 series selling 10 million units when it was available before the PS4 was even launch is a statement to how adoption rates on PC suck ass.
No everyone who owns a PC has a damn 980GTX or a R390 for GPU those people are a HUGE minority,if the R265 can't do it probably the R270 can't as well and the equivalent on Nvidia side,VR can be done on PS4 with that GPU it depends on what it is done obviously you can't do something like the Order looking on it.
Stop your DC i don't like VR from sony,or the one PC has either,the coolest thing i have seeing on VR is a replica of an old arcade gallery where you enter and you would see complete machines cabinets it was mame like and was very early and ran poorly even with old games other than that nothing VR wise has move me to change my mind about it it is as much gimmick on PC as it is on PS4.
@nyadc: Well, jokes on you if you haven't seen my previous posts in this thread. The Gear VR, which is based on a smartphone, can't stay on the shelves right now in the US and Europe.
Unless you feel like building a compelling case for how my Galaxy Note 5 is more powerful than a PS4, it sounds like you don't know what the Sam **** you're talking about.
Why are you trying to create a parallel with console gaming to the mobile market when there is none?
@tormentos said:
@nyadc said:
@Shewgenja said:
Oh, one more for the naysayers. The Web is going VR as well.
Few are naysaying VR, nearly everyone is naysaying Sony's idiotic attempt at it on an extremely weak closed source console, as they should be...
WTF now this is truly pathetic.
WTF make you think that if a R265 like GPU inside the PS4 can't handle it,the majority of PC gamers will even have a half baked experience as the PS4,news freaking flash. Most PC gamers don't even own a GPU as powerful as the PS4,that is the reality on PC the majority of gamers are under PS4 levels of graphics that is a FACT not my opinion sure there are more powerful ones but those are a minority the 600 series selling 10 million units when it was available before the PS4 was even launch is a statement to how adoption rates on PC suck ass.
No everyone who owns a PC has a damn 980GTX or a R390 for GPU those people are a HUGE minority,if the R265 can't do it probably the R270 can't as well and the equivalent on Nvidia side,VR can be done on PS4 with that GPU it depends on what it is done obviously you can't do something like the Order looking on it.
Stop your DC i don't like VR from sony,or the one PC has either,the coolest thing i have seeing on VR is a replica of an old arcade gallery where you enter and you would see complete machines cabinets it was mame like and was very early and ran poorly even with old games other than that nothing VR wise has move me to change my mind about it it is as much gimmick on PC as it is on PS4.
But that is just me.
It can barely handle 1080p single renders at 30 FPS, it goes without saying it can't handle VR to any competent degree. Most PC gamers are not who VR is marketed to, it's marketed to enthusiast level PC owners as it's an enthusiast product, also there's absolutely nothing to back up your "majority" claims in terms of PC gamers related to them having less capable PC's, don't even bring up the Steam stats, that is just a partial picture of the reality of PC gaming not to mention it's vague information and inflated with laptop statistics.
There's no DC, this was just a stupid idea to attempt something like this on such an incapable piece of hardware.
VR has similar rendering considerations as with stereoscopic 3D. There are performance short cut tricks for stereoscopic 3D e.g. recycle depth Z buffer + offset method e.g. Crysis 2 and 3 on Xbox 360. The GPU only renders the second picture with the difference from the primary picture.
One developer who may argue with Girard is Crytek founder Cevat Yerli. At E3 2010 he told VideoGamer that the impact of running upcoming shooter Crysis 2 in 3D is negligible.
"Whenever we show 3D, we show it intentionally on 360 to make the point. It works. It works flawless on PS3, 360 and PC as well. It just works; and one-and-a-half per cent impact only. Out of 30 frames it's 0.4 frames," he said.
"I use the term 'for free', with this game. It's so negligible. And people ask, how do you do it? I say, well, we do render only once. That isn't magic. But we create a second image out of the first one. But how we do it is the magic. That's the secret sauce. I'm happy that we figured it out!"
The devs has to use similar tricks from the last console generation for this console generation. Consoles can't afford PC style brute force.
The tricks use to speed up the console version benefits any entry level gaming PC with R7-260 and R7-265 class GPUs.
CryEngine 3's stereoscopic 3D short-cut tricks needs to be remapped for Oculus Rift.
AMD True-Audio DSPs handles 3D positional audio.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_TrueAudio
Tuscany AstoundSound on YouTube – special version of "Tuscany" VR demo from Oculus VR; AMD TrueAudio is utilized to calculate the spatialization of an audio environment. Spatialization is a technique that permits the audio engine to create a fully 3D soundfield on a stereo headset. This effect is powered by the positional 3D audio plugin "AstoundSound 3D RTI" (real-time interface) by GenAudio, and it includes support for elevation, distance and positioning. AstoundSound is e.g. integrated with the FMOD Studio.
On PS4,
1st CPU core allocated for OS and internet communications
7 CPU cores allocated for game logics and framebuffer setup.
AMD True-Audio DSP allocated for 3D audio.
AMD GPU allocated for visual 3D rendering.
ARM CPU allocated for other background activities e.g. downloading.
Needs extra compute power for VR positional calculations. Btw, Xbox One has extra custom DSPs to handle part of Kinect's workload.
AMD True-Audio has 3 DSP cores and XBO has 4 DSP cores for SHAPE.
This is positive news. I was concerned PS VR was going to be pointless this gen relying only on the PS4. Something giving it extra oomph means it may be worth getting.
This is positive news. I was concerned PS VR was going to be pointless this gen relying only on the PS4. Something giving it extra oomph means it may be worth getting.
VR headset solution will need it's own Audio CODECS(i.e. DAC) and audio power amplifier from PS4's HDMI output.
AMD TrueAudio DSP renders the 3D audio.
Audio CODECS's DAC feature converts digital audio data to analog sound wave.
To maximise VR with 3D positional audio experience, good Audio CODEC chip must be selected.
VR's external box has Kinect like compute DSP hardware + Audio CODEC/DAC chip + audio power amplifier + HDMI to visual hardware.
Working with Sony, PS4+VR seems to be AMD's mass test platform for VR with 3D positional audio.
The assertion for "The PS4 Isn't Powerful Enough To Run PSVR, Will Need An External Processor" is an unwise statement. PS4 with R9-Fury X + Intel Core i7 will still need an external box that contains Audio CODEC/DAC chip + audio power amplifier + HDMI to visual hardware. Extra DSP for positional calculations will guarantee compute availability regardless what CPU or GPU in the main PC box.
Are we literally dumping on VR for any reason now?
Can I start a thread about Virtual Reality starting with a 'V' so it is doomed?
No, we are starting a thread on new news, the same as it has always been.
All of which aside, I'm not even sure how this thread is 'dumping' on VR, especially since its focus seems to be the PS4's specs mandating an external processor. Stop being so sensitive.
why , you sound like the sensationalist agenda driven narrative mainstream news that the usa has been full of for that past 15+ years.... in other words making shit up because you want to bash something. We get it you don't like the ps4.... it runs great, who cares if it needs an extra processor for vr.... whoopti do...
"It's a combination of trolls and half glass empty pessimistic individuals, most of which don't bother educating themselves on the subject of VR."
I go to various forums and Gamespot's SW has some of the biggest VR noobs (and horrible predictors) I've ever seen. The place is infected with fanboys. You look for moderate viewpoints and get sickening hyperbole every time.
These are the same people who said developers would move to the Wii U because it was cheaper, the X1 and Wii U would make a comback, the PS4 would fail, Sony would go out of business this gen, the PS4 hype bubble would burst, and SteamMachines would take over console sales.
And now we have to listen to their definitive words about VR when they never tried it and can't make a good prediction about their own companies.
This cow tho, haha.
@zeeshanhaider said:
No wonder why other forums laugh at this place. They call it the poor-man's Kotaku comment section. Look at the responses of these two....nothing to say, because I made them look like fools.
SteamMachines aren't dominating like they said it would. 970/980s aren't selling like crazy like they said. It's selling, but not enough for publishers to exclusively develop for PCs only, and not enough for Oculus to feel confident with PC VR as their standalone source of revenue/growth.
So I repeat: VR needs high-end PC + consoles (PS4) + mobile to fully rise off the ground. It's never going to do it on PC alone. If you think that, look at that laughing gif to see what I think.
PCMR and Lemz are delusional. They either want VR to fail because Sony is making an HMD. Or they just want the PSVR to fail, believing that a majority of mainstream consumers will immediately upgrade to 970s for VR when they can't even be bothered to do it for traditional gaming.
One more thing to add to the pile of failed predictions!
make.belive
The same user base that don't to spend anything above $400 for hardware once every gen are going to spend $300+ on an accessory for a subpar 900p@40FPS VR experience.
"It's a combination of trolls and half glass empty pessimistic individuals, most of which don't bother educating themselves on the subject of VR."
I go to various forums and Gamespot's SW has some of the biggest VR noobs (and horrible predictors) I've ever seen. The place is infected with fanboys. You look for moderate viewpoints and get sickening hyperbole every time.
These are the same people who said developers would move to the Wii U because it was cheaper, the X1 and Wii U would make a comback, the PS4 would fail, Sony would go out of business this gen, the PS4 hype bubble would burst, and SteamMachines would take over console sales.
And now we have to listen to their definitive words about VR when they never tried it and can't make a good prediction about their own companies.
This cow tho, haha.
@zeeshanhaider said:
No wonder why other forums laugh at this place. They call it the poor-man's Kotaku comment section. Look at the responses of these two....nothing to say, because I made them look like fools.
SteamMachines aren't dominating like they said it would. 970/980s aren't selling like crazy like they said. It's selling, but not enough for publishers to exclusively develop for PCs only, and not enough for Oculus to feel confident with PC VR as their standalone source of revenue/growth.
So I repeat: VR needs high-end PC + consoles (PS4) + mobile to fully rise off the ground. It's never going to do it on PC alone. If you think that, look at that laughing gif to see what I think.
PCMR and Lemz are delusional. They either want VR to fail because Sony is making an HMD. Or they just want the PSVR to fail, believing that a majority of mainstream consumers will immediately upgrade to 970s for VR when they can't even be bothered to do it for traditional gaming.
One more thing to add to the pile of failed predictions!
It can barely handle 1080p single renders at 30 FPS, it goes without saying it can't handle VR to any competent degree. Most PC gamers are not who VR is marketed to, it's marketed to enthusiast level PC owners as it's an enthusiast product, also there's absolutely nothing to back up your "majority" claims in terms of PC gamers related to them having less capable PC's, don't even bring up the Steam stats, that is just a partial picture of the reality of PC gaming not to mention it's vague information and inflated with laptop statistics.
There's no DC, this was just a stupid idea to attempt something like this on such an incapable piece of hardware.
Yeah like the MAJORITY of PC out there by steam.
VR is market to PC gamers periods not just enthusiast dude stop inventing shit.
Yes i do you blind biased lemming,how about more than 100 million steam users.? You can't fu**ing be a true PC gamer and don't have steam.
Bullshit if you don't have steam you are not a freaking gamer period man,most people who game on PC and are outside steam play browser crap games like candy crush and those type of games,so yes Steam survey is valid even more with a user base of more than 100 million even if half those vote that still is one of the biggest fu**ing survey ever,there is no reason to believe that only people with low end machines own steam or play on steam adoption rate on PC suck why in HELL you think MS is giving Windows 10 Free.?
Because it want people to move as fast as possible to DX12 and their new OS,since most people didn't even own windows 8 they were on windows 7 and tons on windows vista still.
Prove it link me to were steam show that laptops pad steam stats the most go ahead.
You are an idiot period i don't like VR but other people may like it fact is it doesn't work on PC either where most people are under PS4 level.
It can barely handle 1080p single renders at 30 FPS, it goes without saying it can't handle VR to any competent degree. Most PC gamers are not who VR is marketed to, it's marketed to enthusiast level PC owners as it's an enthusiast product, also there's absolutely nothing to back up your "majority" claims in terms of PC gamers related to them having less capable PC's, don't even bring up the Steam stats, that is just a partial picture of the reality of PC gaming not to mention it's vague information and inflated with laptop statistics.
There's no DC, this was just a stupid idea to attempt something like this on such an incapable piece of hardware.
Yeah like the MAJORITY of PC out there by steam.
VR is market to PC gamers periods not just enthusiast dude stop inventing shit.
Yes i do you blind biased lemming,how about more than 100 million steam users.? You can't fu**ing be a true PC gamer and don't have steam.
Bullshit if you don't have steam you are not a freaking gamer period man,most people who game on PC and are outside steam play browser crap games like candy crush and those type of games,so yes Steam survey is valid even more with a user base of more than 100 million even if half those vote that still is one of the biggest fu**ing survey ever,there is no reason to believe that only people with low end machines own steam or play on steam adoption rate on PC suck why in HELL you think MS is giving Windows 10 Free.?
Because it want people to move as fast as possible to DX12 and their new OS,since most people didn't even own windows 8 they were on windows 7 and tons on windows vista still.
Prove it link me to were steam show that laptops pad steam stats the most go ahead.
You are an idiot period i don't like VR but other people may like it fact is it doesn't work on PC either where most people are under PS4 level.
You're such a moron, not marketed to enthusiast level PC gamers? Then what the **** do you call the minimum requirements for the Oculus rift?
These are the MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS for a proper and enjoyable VR experience....
You're such a moron, not marketed to enthusiast level PC gamers? Then what the **** do you call the minimum requirements for the Oculus rift?
These are the MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS....
NVIDIA GTX 970 / AMD 290 equivalent or greater
Intel i5-4590 equivalent or greater
8GB+ RAM
Compatible HDMI 1.3 video output
2x USB 3.0 ports
Windows 7 SP1 or newer
"VR is market to PC gamers periods"
God, would you just go away...
It is market to every gamer not just some you idiot,the the minimum spec just show what the device need to work,not that is target to enthusiast reality is if you are a casual and like VR what you need is an PC equivalent to that so stop your damage controls again.
Funny enough by those specs it look like most gamers would be better with a PS4 and VR than PC and VR,from what i have see VR did work and sony show it,and yes it was on PS4 not on PC that they show it,and yes you can't have Uncharted Graphics with it,but never the less you can have a VR experience,and considering that you fu**ing like 720p Halo 5 pathetic graphics and went on a total meltdown denying how pathetic and crappy the game look i would not even go there trying to speak about visuals you may have a good PC but you are nothing but a butthurt LEMMING. :)
...and PS4 VR is still at 1080p. If this VR is expensive (400+) and Sony pulls first-to-the-finish marketing and legal shenanigans, gaming VR could be dead for a while. "Sony - for the gamers."
It can barely handle 1080p single renders at 30 FPS, it goes without saying it can't handle VR to any competent degree. Most PC gamers are not who VR is marketed to, it's marketed to enthusiast level PC owners as it's an enthusiast product, also there's absolutely nothing to back up your "majority" claims in terms of PC gamers related to them having less capable PC's, don't even bring up the Steam stats, that is just a partial picture of the reality of PC gaming not to mention it's vague information and inflated with laptop statistics.
There's no DC, this was just a stupid idea to attempt something like this on such an incapable piece of hardware.
Yeah like the MAJORITY of PC out there by steam.
VR is market to PC gamers periods not just enthusiast dude stop inventing shit.
Yes i do you blind biased lemming,how about more than 100 million steam users.? You can't fu**ing be a true PC gamer and don't have steam.
Bullshit if you don't have steam you are not a freaking gamer period man,most people who game on PC and are outside steam play browser crap games like candy crush and those type of games,so yes Steam survey is valid even more with a user base of more than 100 million even if half those vote that still is one of the biggest fu**ing survey ever,there is no reason to believe that only people with low end machines own steam or play on steam adoption rate on PC suck why in HELL you think MS is giving Windows 10 Free.?
Because it want people to move as fast as possible to DX12 and their new OS,since most people didn't even own windows 8 they were on windows 7 and tons on windows vista still.
Prove it link me to were steam show that laptops pad steam stats the most go ahead.
You are an idiot period i don't like VR but other people may like it fact is it doesn't work on PC either where most people are under PS4 level.
Besides Microsoft's Store (install base more than 100 million), there are several major gaming store app on the PC i.e. Blizzard's Battle.Net (USA), EA's Origin (USA) and Valve's Steam (USA), Prefect World's ARC store (China), CD Projekt's GoG.com (EU via Poland).
Windows Vista's market share is smaller than Windows 8.0, hence your "tons on windows vista" is LOL.
Microsoft Store is enabled for Windows 8.0, 8.1 and 10.
@speak_low said:
@zeeshanhaider said:
make.belive
The same user base that don't to spend anything above $400 for hardware once every gen are going to spend $300+ on an accessory for a subpar 900p@40FPS VR experience.
Your argument hurts your own side then. You say console gamers don't want to shell out another $300 (although there are a LOT of multi-console owners, so they are open to spending more if the content is there). But if people aren't rushing out to buy 970/980s in droves either (nVidia said there are only 5 million "VR Ready" PCs now out of....how many PC gamers across the globe?) then, using the same logic, they aren't rushing out to spend even more for Oculus/Vive any time soon. Your law of frugality and wallet conservatism would apply to PC just as much as console gaming then. And PC VR is presumably going to cost more than console VR. Yeah, if these people do upgrade to 970/980s, they get a video card that doubles as a great traditional 2D gaming card as well. I'm not saying the cards have no use outside of VR. But to go back to an earlier point: mainstream consumers don't seem to care - as much as you adamantly claim - about high end PC gaming. Doesn't mean it's not great...it's just the natural way these sales go for the most expensive version of gaming. If sales were soooo amazing and crushing consoles, I would be seeing Black Friday records and constant news about nVidia and AMD posting smashing sales every quarter, and be able to see clear consumer movement towards high end PC gaming as their final lodging place for the rest of the generation.
But like I said earlier. High end PCs sells closer to the rate of Wii U than the PS4, and looks worse when we bring in all those Steam users around the world. Looks more like apathy rather than amazing.
And I think I know what your second SW account is. Nobody else here types "900p@40FPS" except for you and this other user. If you are who I think you are, it's no wonder your opinions are such a joke. You defended another failed console and couldn't even make correct predictions there, and now you mad. PSVR isn't 900p and 40fps. Typing it fifty times isn't going to make it true.
The context for 5 million VR Ready PCs are for "GeForce VR Ready PCs" and not applicable for AMD side.
This doesn't factor in GPU models that is greater than R7-265 PS4 level GPUs but lower than GTX 970 or R9-290 such as NVIDIA Geforce 660 Ti, 670, 680, 760, 770, 780, 780 Ti, 960 and AMD's 7870 GE, 8870-OEM, 7870 XT, 7950/7950 BE, 7970/7970 GE, 8950-OEM, 8970-OEM, R9-270, R9-270X, R9-280, R9-280X, R9-285, R9-370, R9-370X, R9-380, R9-380X.
From http://www.alistdaily.com/interviews/how-nvidia-will-bring-vr-to-130-million-pcs.html
Can you go into detail about how Nvidia plans to grow the number of VR Ready PCs to "130 million by 2020"?
Two parts. First, is Moore's law — Nvidia GPUs will get faster and faster with VR class performance coming to increasingly mainstream price points.
Second, Nvidia is developing software technologies such as GameWorks VR that delivers substantial performance improvements, enabling even more GeForce PCs to meet the VR performance bar. The net effect of GameWorks VR is a doubling of the VR ready PC installed base in 2016, and an additional 30 million PCs in 2020.
Both AMD and NVIDIA will be relying on process tech improvements such as 14 nm or 16 nm to shift 970 or R9-290 level GPUs into mainstream price range.
For example
Current AMD PC APU with 8 CU IGP at 250 mm^2 chip size.
With 14 nm process tech, R9-290 level GPU is reachable at mainstream prices.
The same user base that don't to spend anything above $400 for hardware once every gen are going to spend $300+ on an accessory for a subpar 900p@40FPS VR experience.
Your argument hurts your own side then. You say console gamers don't want to shell out another $300 (although there are a LOT of multi-console owners, so they are open to spending more if the content is there). But if people aren't rushing out to buy 970/980s in droves either (nVidia said there are only 5 million "VR Ready" PCs now out of....how many PC gamers across the globe?) then, using the same logic, they aren't rushing out to spend even more for Oculus/Vive any time soon. Your law of frugality and wallet conservatism would apply to PC just as much as console gaming then. And PC VR is presumably going to cost more than console VR. Yeah, if these people do upgrade to 970/980s, they get a video card that doubles as a great traditional 2D gaming card as well. I'm not saying the cards have no use outside of VR. But to go back to an earlier point: mainstream consumers don't seem to care - as much as you adamantly claim - about high end PC gaming. Doesn't mean it's not great...it's just the natural way these sales go for the most expensive version of gaming. If sales were soooo amazing and crushing consoles, I would be seeing Black Friday records and constant news about nVidia and AMD posting smashing sales every quarter, and be able to see clear consumer movement towards high end PC gaming as their final lodging place for the rest of the generation.
But like I said earlier. High end PCs sells closer to the rate of Wii U than the PS4, and looks worse when we bring in all those Steam users around the world. Looks more like apathy rather than amazing.
Nope, it doesn't hurt my argument at all. PC Gamers like me who are intrigued by VR and high end graphics understands what it takes to achieve such level of fidelity unlike you consoLOLites. I would have no problem shelling out $400-500 for VR if its worth it and I'm sure there are millions more who are willing to spend even more. Hell people already have Oculus and games are modified to run on it. Have you seen any consoLOLite playing Dying Light in VR? No? Thought so. On PC it's already modified to run on VR.
VR won't just survive because of the official game support but by mods and other hacks like that enable traditional games to be played in VR. I can't see your 900pStation running Dying Light in 1080p@90FPS.
There are 5 million VR ready PC's now but I'm sorry to say there aren't even any Full HD ready consoLOLes. Deal with it. I don't know at what resolution or FPS PSVR will run at but looking at the creme de le creme devs of Sony trying to hit 60 FPS the situation doesn't look very hopeful. I mean Naughty Duds are producing a 900p turd at 40FPS and before Sony tried 60 FPS they had to go subHD. Fact.
And I think I know what your second SW account is. Nobody else here types "900p@40FPS" except for you and this other user. If you are who I think you are, it's no wonder your opinions are such a joke. You defended another failed console and couldn't even make correct predictions there, and now you mad. PSVR isn't 900p and 40fps. Typing it fifty times isn't going to make it true.
So, now I'm a lemming. That's some really new shit though El-Tomato, ShitTy and ReadingRainbow already played that card. Try something new. I must say, it feels really pathetic to be a cow since there's no way you can defend Sony or your favorite inanimate object that's why you cows always resort to lem hiding behind PC argument. GG.
Log in to comment