Sony VR Headset/Project Morpheus/PlayStation VR

Perfectly smooth 90fps on the minimum recommended specs without ever fiddling with the game's graphics settings. Riiiiiiiight.... :LOL:

I do expect drama. I'll definitely upgrade my GPU way above the minimum specs when I'll get my Rift.

[drama]
Oh I got the setting okay, no headaches at last!! Oh no the second level is more taxing I have to fiddle again!! Oh no when there are too many trees I have to drop it more because it's the CPU bottlenecking in those levels!! Oh when I put it on Automatic Settings it's 90fps stable, but there's no shadows and it's stuck fugly!! Automatic settings drops the wrong things I have to fiddle again!! Oh there's a patch available, let's see if it solves my problems!!
[/drama]

I'll keep what I got and then upgrade later in the year when the 16nm stuff comes out. Why buy twice !
 
Plus a new CPU, and a new motherboard, and new ram since it just moved to DDR4, and also $400 for the rift.

Playstation VR looks like quite a bargain at 299, doesn't it?
Sony have a major advantage if the goal is to sell many headset to establish a user base.
 
Last edited:
Plus a new CPU, and a new motherboard, and new ram since it just moved to DDR4, and also $400 for the rift.

Playstation VR looks like quite a bargain at 299, doesn't it?
Sony have a major advantage if the goal is to sell many headset to establish a user base.

I honestly think Playstation might provide the best VR experience. It won't have the absolute best graphics, but it will be the most affordable option, and the fixed spec will guarantee that devs can profile exactly how the game will run and mitigate all of the worst issues, where on the PC you're left to get it right on your own, adjusting settings as you see fit. Unless you have a really top-end PC to powerhouse all the games, you'll have to do some fiddling with settings. Experimenting with VR sickness is not the greatest thing.
 
I think 399. My PC is also ready, i7 with 970 GTX 16GB RAM. I am quite likely to get both if they review well and the software is there.
 
Plus a new CPU, and a new motherboard, and new ram since it just moved to DDR4, and also $400 for the rift.

Playstation VR looks like quite a bargain at 299, doesn't it?
Sony have a major advantage if the goal is to sell many headset to establish a user base.

Why are you comparing 2x $400 16nm GPU's + a Skylake CPU (since that's the only one that needs DDR4) to the PS4?

If eastman were to spend that much on his machine it would be in no way comparable to the PS4 performance wise so why try to draw some kind of equivalency in cost?

For a PS4/Morpheus level experience on the PC you're going to need a single 970 class GPU which today is about $310 and by the time these headsets launch will likely be around $250 or less. That will obviously provide a better experience at a higher resolution and frame rate but since that resolution and framerate is a requirement for OR I'm treating it as a minimum. Any modern(ish) quad core is obviously going to be more than enough to provide an equal or better experience. I see no reason to suggest a Skylake with DDR4 would be required.
 
Unless you have a really top-end PC to powerhouse all the games, you'll have to do some fiddling with settings. Experimenting with VR sickness is not the greatest thing.

Or you could just click the button in GeForce Experience that says "optimize game for VR".
 
I upgraded my PC last year with a 780 and a midrange i5 which are both considered below recommended. I'm not going to side-grade to a 970.

Unless you upgraded your PC this year, it's probably below recommended performance and/or GPU feature set. There are no guarantees the 700 series will work. Some games might be fine, others might not.

Whether or not it will look better than the PS4 is unimportant. I don't only upgrade my PC so that games look better, I upgrade so that I can play the recent games without issues. The graphics in TLoU on PS3 look fine, but there's no such thing on a PC with specs equivalent to a PS3. You just have to upgrade continuously to play recent games without problems. VR is pushing this requirement much much further at launch.
 
I upgraded my PC last year with a 780 and a midrange i5 which are both considered below recommended. I'm not going to side-grade to a 970.

The recommended CPU is a mid range i5. Specifically a 4590 which is a Haswell at 3.3 Ghz. Do you really think a couple hundred Mhz and/or the architectural differences between Ivy and Haswell would make all the difference? I think it goes without saying that if a 4950 is the recommended spec for Oculus Rift then pretty much any mid range i5 from the last 3 generations is going to be fine. Certainly that is the case for every single game released in the last several years. i.e. the recommended CPU spec is far above what is actually required to max the game out.

I'm not going to side-grade to a 970. Unless you upgraded your PC this year, it's probably below recommended performance and/or GPU feature set. There are no guarantees the 700 series will work. Some games might be fine, others might not.

It doesn't matter whether you want to side grade or not, you still have that option so it can't be ignored if you're doing a price comparison. Essentially your choice is to stick with the 780 and maybe sometimes have to drop the resolution down to PS4 levels to maintain a solid 90fps, pay $250 for a minor upgrade that should at least guarantee you a consistent experience at the OR's native resolution, or spend more and get a much better all round experience than Morpheus.

I upgrade so that I can play the recent games without issues. The graphics in TLoU on PS3 look fine, but there's no such thing on a PC with specs equivalent to a PS3. You just have to upgrade continuously to play recent games without problems.

As a PC gamer you should know that's a fallacy. You don't have to "upgrade continuously" to play recent games without issues. Games scale precisely to make that unnecessary. Sure you have to upgrade fairly regularly to play all games at maximum settings but that's worlds away from "playing games without issues" and is not comparable to the console experience which over time equates to continually lower PC settings - the same experience you'd get from sticking with a single GPU. My 670 wasn't top end when I bought it and it's coming up to 4 years old now, that's as old as some consoles lifespans. And yet it's still more than capable of playing every single game out there at some combination of settings (those settings usually being very close to maximum in the latest games).

The same should be true of a 970 with Oculus Rift. Over time it will obviously fall behind in being able to max out game settings, but it should at least be capable of native res at 90fps at some setting combination for a long time.
 
Plus a new CPU, and a new motherboard, and new ram since it just moved to DDR4, and also $400 for the rift.

Playstation VR looks like quite a bargain at 299, doesn't it?
Sony have a major advantage if the goal is to sell many headset to establish a user base.

I doubt I need a new CPU and ram. I'm running a i7 3770 with 16 gigs of ram. Looking at benchmarks you really wouldn't need more than an i5 from the last few years.

Sony VR will still cost me $350 ps4 $300-$400 for the headset. So i'm still looking at $700 or so. $1000 isn't much of a difference and I'd have a higher graphics fidelity than the ps4 , unless you think the ps4 will compete with 2 $400 16nm video cards.
 
I'm really having fun turning this thread into a PC master race discussion... :LOL:

I need to be punished.
 
I doubt I need a new CPU and ram. I'm running a i7 3770 with 16 gigs of ram. Looking at benchmarks you really wouldn't need more than an i5 from the last few years.

Sony VR will still cost me $350 ps4 $300-$400 for the headset. So i'm still looking at $700 or so. $1000 isn't much of a difference and I'd have a higher graphics fidelity than the ps4 , unless you think the ps4 will compete with 2 $400 16nm video cards.

ist that will be

350 PS4
350 Headset
100 PS cam + dildos (forgot the name)
 
ist that will be

350 PS4
350 Headset
100 PS cam + dildos (forgot the name)
na , i think that will be included in the price. If the move controllers are anything like the xbox 360 controller it only cost $5 for ms to make. The PS camera sells for $60 I think . So I don't thik its a big cost to add in.
 
I'm really having fun turning this thread into a PC master race discussion... [emoji38]2:

I need to be punished.
If you're a PC gamer you need to start acting like you're superior and that the hardware will always be superior to consoles under any circumstances. Come on, you sound too much like you think the PlayStation might offer a similar experience.

You are a PC gamer. Start acting like one.

/sarcasm
 
Playstation VR looks like quite a bargain at 299, doesn't it?
Sony have a major advantage if the goal is to sell many headset to establish a user base.

Yup, Sony has not only price advantage, but also big install base of PS4s and already ready accessory ecosystem [camera, move]. All that remains is for them to deliver on the software front.
 
I doubt I need a new CPU and ram. I'm running a i7 3770 with 16 gigs of ram. Looking at benchmarks you really wouldn't need more than an i5 from the last few years.

Sony VR will still cost me $350 ps4 $300-$400 for the headset. So i'm still looking at $700 or so. $1000 isn't much of a difference and I'd have a higher graphics fidelity than the ps4 , unless you think the ps4 will compete with 2 $400 16nm video cards.

Yeah, only around 50% more :|
 
Back
Top