Sony VR Headset/Project Morpheus/PlayStation VR

I wish for a $350 for PSVR and $600 for PSVR+PS4 bundle.
Anyway, if they priced PSVR more than PS4, it would probably look a bit off from general pov. Basically a peripheral is more expensive than the console itself and that would be a bit hard to communicate. The ceiling will probably be $400 which is the PS4 introductory price. If they sell PSVR at $400, I would expect a bundle with PS4 with $700 max price. With OVR priced at $600, if Sony can hit $600 bundled with the console, their marketing would have a field day (maybe at the expensive of their finance dept....).
 
Existing PS4 owners are unlikely to be fussed by resolution or frame rates - anybody for which one (or both) are important factors are probably not gaming on a console in the first place so this would only be a detracting factor for those who don't currently have VR capable gaming hardware but are keen to get in.

Having low frame rate/high latency in a VR title will very likely make you motion sick. Also, nobody cares about frame rates, people care about the experience that a higher frame rate (or lower latency) enables.
 
Having low frame rate/high latency in a VR title will very likely make you motion sick.

Sony have been clear about minimum viable framerate and I've not read anything about latency issues. When I talk of framerate, this is relative to Rift.
 
No, it is literally a simple remote.

Yes I see they've clarified that now. So given that will cost virtually nothing in terms of BOM, and Luckey has already said the control pad costs them virtually nothing, it seems like the headset itself must have a very high BOM to still be selling at a loss. I don't think that bodes well for either the price of PSVR or Sony's bottom line.
 
Luckily for Sony they've been a hardware manufacturer for many years. R&D has already been spent on optics and displays long before they ever considered VR.
 
'Tarted up DK2' seems a bit inaccurate, now that we know about the high framerate OLED screen and the separate box.
Granted it's a better screen than the DK2, but it's still essentially the same ingredients as DK2.

I don't mean this in a derogatory way. A 1080p single screen HMD is a great fit for PS4.
 
Sony have been clear about minimum viable framerate and I've not read anything about latency issues. When I talk of framerate, this is relative to Rift.
I think overall it's agreeable to more frame rate and more screen refresh should ultimately have a better experience with regards to motion sickness.


The high refresh helps with the flickering and the higher the frame rate to see more change as you move your head around.

While I agree there are minimums, or acceptable factors that was just a general statement.

The biggest concerns for me are of course the Lens technology. There are people with incorrect vision, glasses, bifocals, eye spacing, At the end of the day you are looking and focusing on a screen 1-2 inches away from your face. There has to be some sort of magnification or changes to focal distance.

Getting that lens right for each user is the key to not making nausea. Just recall the first time you put on a new prescription of glasses or alternating between contacts lens and glasses.

There are subtle focal changes that alone will affect people, I imagine some setups will agree more with people that others.

Which is inherently why I think price may not matter. Even if PSVR Is cheaper as long as you don't get sick more power to you. But if you are getting sick and you try the oculus or vive and don't get as sick/not sick than that's what you need to work with. They invested more in lens to support more types of heads (maybe).

But that's where I'm thinking at least. Price is a lot of things but this time we must also consider fit.
 
The biggest concerns for me are of course the Lens technology. There are people with incorrect vision, glasses, bifocals, eye spacing, At the end of the day you are looking and focusing on a screen 1-2 inches away from your face. There has to be some sort of magnification or changes to focal distance.

Not my area of expertise but this problem was solved decades ago when in-helmet HUDs became common. My understanding is that anybody competent in optics will have the know how to produce something that will work for a wide range of people with differing visual problems.

I'm long sighted in my left eye and short sighted in my right but I've had no problems using VR headsets as long I have something (spectacles, contacts) that correct this.
 
Not my area of expertise but this problem was solved decades ago when in-helmet HUDs became common. My understanding is that anybody competent in optics will have the know how to produce something that will work for a wide range of people with differing visual problems.

I'm long sighted in my left eye and short sighted in my right but I've had no problems using VR headsets as long I have something (spectacles, contacts) that correct this.
Right. But unfortunately that may not be true for everyone. Some people wear incorrect prescriptions or some people wear glasses wrong etc. Some people don't have contacts. Or the helmet messed up the sitting of your glasses.

I get where you are going with your point though. It is the logical setup for anyone requiring corrective vision.

It may be slightly racist against well myself but myself and all my Asian friends had huge difficulties with rift. But my white buddies did not! It's experimental data, but it's also a sign that each setup will affect people differently. I'm curious on whether they solved this issue or not (at least selfishly for myself :)
 
Right. But unfortunately that may not be true for everyone. Some people wear incorrect prescriptions or some people wear glasses wrong etc.
I don't think these are problems that manufacturers can reasonably be expected to solve. You shouldn't drive a car with poor vision but it's not car manufacturers responsibility to accommodate customers who won't get new glasses.

Some people don't have contacts. Or the helmet messed up the sitting of your glasses.

Reports from people who've used PSVR report the headset has plenty of room to accommodate glasses because the visor is adjustable in that you can move it closer or further away from your eyes. You've seen pictures of Shuhei Yoshida I assume?
 
Yes I see they've clarified that now. So given that will cost virtually nothing in terms of BOM, and Luckey has already said the control pad costs them virtually nothing, it seems like the headset itself must have a very high BOM to still be selling at a loss. I don't think that bodes well for either the price of PSVR or Sony's bottom line.
I have a few educated guesses...

Oculus could be using something like Nikon's Phase Fresnel or Canon's DO fresnel. These are essentially fine pitch fresnel which need to be made of glass. Very expensive.

Vive could be using a PMMA coarse pitch fresnel, for much much lower price, and slightly lower image quality.

PSVR is possibly the only one skipping the fresnel, and it seems to have an AR coating (which requires a hard coating). It would have the advantage of price being in-between the Oculus and Vive, and disadvantages of weight (which could be significantly reduced by using a high-index plastic, for more money).
 
It may be slightly racist against well myself but myself and all my Asian friends had huge difficulties with rift.
Depends on where in asia you are, some countries are highly % of myopia some with low %
I'm picking the price of PSVR to be between $200-$300, I think a lot are guessing a lot higher than that
 
Psvr is developed by Japan company for worldwide market. I think they would make it works for Asian and non Asian.

Btw who made the screen?
 
Psvr is developed by Japan company for worldwide market. I think they would make it works for Asian and non Asian.

Btw who made the screen?
I don't think they've said. It sounds like it has better pixel fill than Samsungs, based on the impressions I've read. I think it's full rgb instead of pentile?
 
Back
Top