VR Tracking *spawn*

[eastmen]

On the topic of PSVR's tracking: it's mostly absolutely fine, but it does suffer from drifting. The Move controllers are more prone to tracking issues, but I generally find that a bit of a wiggle fixes them.

Is there any benefit to combining the current, fixed camera form of tracking with inside out?

I ask because I firmly expect PSVR2 to be wireless, which requires line of sight with a transmitter. To my mind, the most practical solution would be for the next PS camera to contain said transmitter. But then, why would they bother with inside out tracking unless it offers some benefit?

1)mostly absolutely fine is not a thing .Its either fine or it isn't. The problem with move is that its tracking only one light source at the top of the controller. If you look at something like touch there are dozens of ir lights in it to track and based on the pattern it can tell what direction its pointing. Its also harder to mistake it with random reflections.

2) Yes inside out your going to be limited to the fov of the headset. So anytime your body gets in the way or there is a lack of camera visability due to placement an external camera / light house can pick up the slack. its good if you want to add in things like foot tracking.

For high end pc vr , I would not be surprised is the companies go for both. For something like santa cruz the inside out on its own would be enough for most experiances.

3) I doubt psv will be wireless unless the resolution barely increases. Its a lot of data to transmit and the set ups we have today are really bulky and require dedicated routers for it.

https://www.roadtovr.com/htcs-vive-wireless-adaptor-works-with-vive-and-vive-pro/

Of course it would look much nicer intergrated from the start into the design. however the tpcast adds almost $300 to the cost of a vive. I would love a wireless solution but I think higher resolution and greater fov are more important at this stage than that .

 

[Tkumpathenurpahl]

1)mostly absolutely fine is not a thing .Its either fine or it isn't.

Not true. My new shoes are mostly absolutely fine: generally they're absolutely fine, but occasionally they pinch my heels a bit.

The problem with move is that its tracking only one light source at the top of the controller. If you look at something like touch there are dozens of ir lights in it to track and based on the pattern it can tell what direction its pointing. Its also harder to mistake it with random reflections.

Yup, I hope they've learned their lessons. There was a patent on this forum a while ago, which showed a split DualShock kind of design, with lights akin to those on PSVR, so I'm quite confident that the next attempt will be absolutely fine... mostly

2) Yes inside out your going to be limited to the fov of the headset. So anytime your body gets in the way or there is a lack of camera visability due to placement an external camera / light house can pick up the slack. its good if you want to add in things like foot tracking.

For high end pc vr , I would not be surprised is the companies go for both. For something like santa cruz the inside out on its own would be enough for most experiances.

Good points. Hopefully that's what we see, then. At least one camera on the front of the headset would be welcomed, even if not of use for tracking - just to be able to hold a button on the headset and see the outside wield.

3) I doubt psv will be wireless unless the resolution barely increases. Its a lot of data to transmit and the set ups we have today are really bulky and require dedicated routers for it.

https://www.roadtovr.com/htcs-vive-wireless-adaptor-works-with-vive-and-vive-pro/

Of course it would look much nicer intergrated from the start into the design. however the tpcast adds almost $300 to the cost of a vive. I would love a wireless solution but I think higher resolution and greater fov are more important at this stage than that .

True, but when I watched a demonstration of one of the wireless solutions, they were talking about having future proofed their tech by, even at this early stage, ensuring it supports 4K.

They also spoke of the way that the most important part of their tech is the way that they can constantly adjust transmitted resolution in accordance with available bandwidth. My ears pricked up at that, because it's also the most important tech for Remote Play and PSNow.

So I think there's a very good chance that Sony would want to integrate dynamic resolution tech into the PS5 console anyway. If so, I think a wireless PSVR2 is almost begging to be released.

 

[eastmen]

Not true. My new shoes are mostly absolutely fine: generally they're absolutely fine, but occasionally they pinch my heels a bit.

get new shoes then. Those aren't fine shoes they sound terrible

Yup, I hope they've learned their lessons. There was a patent on this forum a while ago, which showed a split DualShock kind of design, with lights akin to those on PSVR, so I'm quite confident that the next attempt will be absolutely fine... mostly

we can only hope they leave move behind

Good points. Hopefully that's what we see, then. At least one camera on the front of the headset would be welcomed, even if not of use for tracking - just to be able to hold a button on the headset and see the outside wield.

I think with sony's camera tech they will try and catch up to other companies doing inside out. They have a lot of tech to leverage , its just we haven't see any tech they have used this way by them

True, but when I watched a demonstration of one of the wireless solutions, they were talking about having future proofed their tech by, even at this early stage, ensuring it supports 4K.

They also spoke of the way that the most important part of their tech is the way that they can constantly adjust transmitted resolution in accordance with available bandwidth. My ears pricked up at that, because it's also the most important tech for Remote Play and PSNow.

So I think there's a very good chance that Sony would want to integrate dynamic resolution tech into the PS5 console anyway. If so, I think a wireless PSVR2 is almost begging to be released.

I mean you can think thats a good idea but what happens when something turns on that interfears with it ? Or you have something move into the field of view. Do you think playstation owners will want to run a wire up to the celling and out to the middle of the room ? Then what about costs ? Your adding in alot more hardware . And its not cheap hardware it ads almost $300 to a vive or rift at this point. Are people willing to pay double just for wireless? What if sony doesn't go inside out and uses a newer camera system . Your going to run a line of site router for wireless , then run at least two cameras for room scale tracking across your room to play vr ? Now your looking at a complicated mess , people didn't want to move coffee tables to play kinect. Now they are going to run all this through thier living room ? Now maybe they don't do room scale... but then whats the point of a wireless headset.

I think in terms of importantance for a next gen headset you have inside out tracking then 4k + resolution then higher fov , wireless would be down the list some where