Sony PSVR value versus competing VR solutions *spawn

[eastmen]

First, no you can't. The only 2 models available are for the Note 4 and the plain S6. Second, a contract phone is financed, you pay full price for it over the course of your contract. Otherwise you can go to a store and get a PS4 for $0 with 12 month financing, or using a credit card or whatever.

A mobile phone is not a console. It is not competing for the same users and history have repeatedly proven this. Mobile is the land of micro-transaction, compulsive gambling, and pay to win. Console is the land of $70 AAA games with high production value. The overlap exist but it remains small.

You twist everything with a mental gymnastic I can't even begin to describe, it's like you first decide what conclusion you wish for, and then work your way backwards.

I think the problem is how we think of phones.

People are going to buy phones regardless , you have tweens with the newest iphones and galaxies . The phone itself will be used for a myriad of reasons . The $100 would be the dedicated to the gaming.

The ps4 will play triple A games sure but just look at recent games on the ps4 . Star Wars Battlefront is 1600x900p and struggles to keep a 60fps average . The system is struggling to play this generations games.

 

[eastmen]

the 15 TF PC will cost way more than a PS4.
But PS3 level power, a mobile solution, isn't enough for decent VR. You appreciate that - if people were suggesting using PS3 for VR you'd be very vocal about how inadequate it is.

A 15TF pc will cost more sure. A $300 r290 (and this can be bought today) will already play battlefield at 1080p 80fps ultra settings vs 1600x900 60fps with a mix of medium to high settings on the ps3 .

You still pay; it's just deferred. As MrFox says, get a console on credit and you have the same thing. Heck, get a $2000 PC on credit and it's $0 up front.

Sure but the purchasing of cell phoens for people is different than a video game system. Its a device they have with them all day long and is also a status symbol .

That's ridiculous. Mobile won't be getting PS4 level performance for ages, and you already consider PS4 fairly weak for VR.
Rendering res won't be native. There's not enough power there. Mobile solution is a novelty, not true VR.

IT depends on what your looking for. I keep using minecraft as an example but you don't need a ps4 or a high end pc to play it.

Also when you compare the ps4 to the pc , the pcs will continue to pull further and further away from the ps4. The Ps4 wont move in terms of hardware. So yes phones will continue to move towards ps4 level graphics. I'm not saying the s7 will be that , but its still going to move forward and consumer habits show people get new cell phones every year to two years.

Let's actual structure this. Do you think 1) PS3 level performance is suitable for VR and so PS4 is absolutely rockingly good? Or 2) PC with massive GF the only real solution and so PS4 is pretty weak and thus mobile VR is utterly inadequate? You can't have it both ways so which direction should the discussion settle on?

I can always have it both ways !

Anyway , this is my answer to you. I have a card board and I have gear vr ordered and I will buy a rift day one.

This is why. The ps4 wont be good enough for vr . As the generation pushes on as with all of them games will want to increase the graphical fidelity and its going to be hard when you have to maintain 1080p 60 or 120hz . At the same time the investment in a better computer gets cheaper over time .

The gear VR is different , I don't think it will enable the same experiances as the rift will . However it has something that the psvr or rift doesn't have and that's the device its teathered to. Its mobile , no wires or anything I can take it on the plane or take it in the car or what have you. The ps4 doesn't offer that and i'm not sure if the rift will enable it even if I connect it to my surface , I don't know how builky the wires will be.

 

[MrFox]

I think the problem is how we think of phones.

No, the problem is how we think of Sony VR Project Morpheus, in the Consoles forum.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Anyway , this is my answer to you. I have a card board and I have gear vr ordered and I will buy a rift day one.
This is why...

It's not about you but the mainstream consumer - the hundreds of millions who don't and won't own a Note and don't owna PS4 and don't own a suitable PC. You were arguing against views PSVR will be successful because its the cheapest full VR solution. Obviously that statement has the caveat that people who already own a Note or other device and don't want AAA VR games have cheaper options, and likewise people who already own a suitable PC or a PC just needing a new $200-300 GPU have cheaper options. The remark was directed at PSVR's main audience though, which is people wanting the new generation of VR games. For them there's only two options - PS4 and PC. And if they have no console or suitable PC (or don't want to go the PC route as the mainstream consumer might not), PSVR is the cheapest option.

Cheaper options don't provide a strong enough experience (PS3 level).
PC offers a better experience at an increased premium (and although prettier, not fundamentally different, like XB1 is 'the same experience' as PS4).
PSVR offers the cheapest full VR experience (all the VR games, all the VR inputs including controllers and motion controls, low latency, fast refresh).

 

[Arwin]

Ok so I actually tried VR with my iPhone 6 Plus and Homido and ... It works, but power limitations are clearly a huge issue.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

I took a look at the costs for each of the VR devices and the required hardware/software for each of them. All considering the consumer doesn’t have any of them already. I took all of the costs straight from Amazon USA to keep everything consistent.

Here are absolute base PC specs (from what I understand) and their prices:

Motherboard $142 ASUS Z97-A ATX
CPU $325 Intel Core i5-4690K
GPU $320 EVGA GeForce GTX 970 4GB
Memory $45 Crucial Ballistix Sport 8GB
HDD $53 WD Blue 1TB Desktop 3.5 Inch SATA 6Gb/s 7200rpm
Case $55 Corsair Carbide Series 100R Mid
Keyboard / Mouse $20 Logitech Wireless Combo MK270 with Keyboard and Mouse
Win 10 $120 Microsoft Windows 10 Home
Oculus Rift $350 Estimated Consumer Version
Touch Controllers $50 Estimated price - probably higher
Total $1480

And now for the PS4, I’ve obviously had to estimate the PSVR costs, but that could be +/- the price listed here:

PS4 + controller + game $350
PS VR $350
Total $700

And for the mobile choice as described in this thread:

Samsung Gear VR $210
Sumsung Note 4 $725
Total $935

Keep in mind that the specs for the PC are bare minimum, since the 970 is considered the lowest level for the Oculus Rift. How much of a difference will the 970 and the Oculus Rift give compared to the PSVR is debatable, I’d suggest the 970 should give a very similar experience to the PS4 at the higher resolution and framerate. Alternatively, the PSVR could give a better experience on a basic 120hz game compared to the max resolution and hz of the Oculus Rift.

So based on this which would you say give the best value/$ ratio? I know which one my money (figuratively) is on.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

The problem with lists like those is that they only show one side. Its like saying a bicycle is cheaper mode of transportation than a car. There is no denying that but it doesn't say that a bicycle is pretty slow, you are not protected against the elements, you can't take your family or friends with you, you can transport anything weighing more than a couple of kg any any distance over 10 ~ 15km becomes a chore.

The same way a console is obviously going to be the cheapest option if you are going to calculate how much is cost to play a VR game. However it doesn't take into account that the Note 4 will not only act as your VR device but will also fullfill all your communication needs. In other words, you won't have to spend any extra money on getting a phone. However a half decent smartphone will cost you 300 euros. Now you might say somebody might not be interested in a smartphone and could get a 20 euro clam shell phone. Maybe, but in the 10/20/30 year old age group, which is exactly the group consoles are aiming for, how many of them don't own a smartphone?

So its a PS4 + phone. PC comparison is a similar story. Owning a pc might mean somebody can go without a tablet or laptop for productivity reasons. That's going to save 300 ~ 600 euros.

So there are many different ways in which you can compare. I am pretty sure that the early pc adapters will be people that already have pretty beefy pc's, so they for example will only have to buy a VR headset.

 

[Arwin]

I have all requirements, PC, PS4, smartphone all up to spec. I plan on trying all major options. I just tried mobile, and that looks like a no go except for a handful of things like watching 2D movies on a huge screen perhaps, which seems cool.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The same way a console is obviously going to be the cheapest option if you are going to calculate how much is cost to play a VR game...So there are many different ways in which you can compare.

And they're all just stupid noise at this point. May as well say consoles won't sell any more because people can play games on their mobile.

It'd probably be best if we just stop the PSVR competition discussion here as there's no meaningful consensus to be achieved. We can conclude with recognition that PSVR faces several competing VR solutions and will find its market in a particular subset of the total VR market. Views on how strong that competition is should probably be held in another thread if one really wants, similar to console company business choices versus tech and peripheral discussions.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Here are absolute base PC specs (from what I understand) and their prices:

Motherboard $142 ASUS Z97-A ATX
CPU $325 Intel Core i5-4690K
GPU $320 EVGA GeForce GTX 970 4GB
Memory $45 Crucial Ballistix Sport 8GB
HDD $53 WD Blue 1TB Desktop 3.5 Inch SATA 6Gb/s 7200rpm
Case $55 Corsair Carbide Series 100R Mid
Keyboard / Mouse $20 Logitech Wireless Combo MK270 with Keyboard and Mouse
Win 10 $120 Microsoft Windows 10 Home
Oculus Rift $350 Estimated Consumer Version
Touch Controllers $50 Estimated price - probably higher
Total $1480

"Absolute base" specs would never include a motherboard with the Z chipset and an unlocked K-series CPU.
Besides, there's no sense in going with a 2.5 year-old Haswell when Skylake is already there so:
$200 Core i5 6500, $100 H170 motherboard.
That's $160 less. Then again, you're missing a PSU so that would be some $60 more.

If you're looking for an actual VR-centric system, then a dual GPU solution would be bound to get better performance.
That means $30 for a motherboard capable of 8x/8x PCI-Express operation and $80 more on 2* Radeon R380 4GB.


Although perhaps we should take in consideration that very few people would be purchasing a desktop from the ground up nowadays.
Who doesn't have an ATX case, a PSU, DDR3, HDDs/SSDs, keyboard+mouse and a Windows 7/8/10 license laying around?
Most people who are interested in VR for PC gaming will need little more than the Rift and perhaps just a graphics card upgrade.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

Who doesn't have an ATX case, a PSU, DDR3, HDDs/SSDs, keyboard+mouse and a Windows 7/8/10 license laying around?

I don't. I have a personal laptop and a work laptop. None of that other stuff at all.

I think we're at risk of getting our wrists slapped by Shifty by continuing the conversation. And he's right, shouldn't we be discussing the PSVR here anyway? It is the console forum.

 

[upnorthsox]

Although perhaps we should take in consideration that very few people would be purchasing a desktop from the ground up nowadays.
Who doesn't have an ATX case, a PSU, DDR3, HDDs/SSDs, keyboard+mouse and a Windows 7/8/10 license laying around?
Most people who are interested in VR for PC gaming will need little more than the Rift and perhaps just a graphics card upgrade.

Slowly raises hand..........

 

[pjbliverpool]

Then you will also need a monitor, which was not included in that PC component shopping list.

Or you could plug it into the TV for an apples to apples comparison. But since this is a VR discussion, surely neither a monitor or TV are necessary? Afterall in this (and seemingly every other console vs PC price comparison in the history of the internet) we are ignoring the value added from the additional functionality of the PC so why would a monitor be needed at all? According to the comparison above we are basing the PC's value proposition on it's VR capabilities only which are apparently "almost the same" except for much higher resolution and frame rate which are for some reason now considered to be insignificant factors for VR.

 

[DieH@rd]

Screen is needed, I really think that nobody will use only VR and not interact with UI/gameshopping/community/general purpose use on flat displays. HDTV is also needed for asymetric coop games. They are rare, so far only Sony is developing couch coop VR games.

But most importantly, I don't think that most of general gaming population is prepared to play in VR without providing other people in their surrounding the way to see 'into their viewpoint'. They don't want to be in complete isolation. That's why every VR demo shown so far in public events always featured separate TV feed. Oculus and PSVR have dedicated processing box for making that TV feed happen. I don't know what Vive does for that.

 

[eastmen]

"Absolute base" specs would never include a motherboard with the Z chipset and an unlocked K-series CPU.
Besides, there's no sense in going with a 2.5 year-old Haswell when Skylake is already there so:
$200 Core i5 6500, $100 H170 motherboard.
That's $160 less. Then again, you're missing a PSU so that would be some $60 more.

If you're looking for an actual VR-centric system, then a dual GPU solution would be bound to get better performance.
That means $30 for a motherboard capable of 8x/8x PCI-Express operation and $80 more on 2* Radeon R380 4GB.


Although perhaps we should take in consideration that very few people would be purchasing a desktop from the ground up nowadays.
Who doesn't have an ATX case, a PSU, DDR3, HDDs/SSDs, keyboard+mouse and a Windows 7/8/10 license laying around?
Most people who are interested in VR for PC gaming will need little more than the Rift and perhaps just a graphics card upgrade.

There are many options .

You could also just go with an amd system for VR have a complete system made for under $1,000 monitor included and a r290

 

[MrFox]

My list of random thoughts about competition and market share.

• Gamers with a powerful PC are now considering either Vive or Oculus for VR.
  
• Some PC gamers won't buy into VR now, and are waiting for future generations in the coming years because oculus specs are unacceptable (which was eastmen position, not sure what happened here).
  
• PC gamers without the recommended specs are considering upgrading their PC specifically for VR.
  
• Gamers who already own a PS4 are considering buying PSVR.
  
• Gamers considering a first time console, or upgrading to a current gen console, are now taking into account the availability of PSVR when choosing PS4 instead of XB1, whether they buy it at the same time or not.
  
• Those with a compatible phone are considering buying an add-on for VR.
• Those in the process of upgrading their phone are now taking into account the models that support VR.
• Those who want the VR they experienced at trade shows, and have neither a compatible PC nor a PS4, will consider one of those two. It is only in this case that the value of PS4 is winning with it's accessible price. Smartphones are not offering those experiences.
  
• All of this will fail without good games. Making good games needs investment, which needs a large paying user base. Good games also depend on the platform being technically good enough for those experiences
  
• the requirements for VR are being discovered by the current VR pioneers, they all agree it needs 90Hz minimum for presence.
• There is no competition between PS4 and smartphone VR for the same reasons there is no competition between PC and Nintendo 3DS.
• There is a limited competition between PS4 VR and PC VR, to the extent of one having neither a PS4 nor a PC with compatible specs.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Screen is needed, I really think that nobody will use only VR and not interact with UI/gameshopping/community/general purpose use on flat displays. HDTV is also needed for asymetric coop games. They are rare, so far only Sony is developing couch coop VR games.

But most importantly, I don't think that most of general gaming population is prepared to play in VR without providing other people in their surrounding the way to see 'into their viewpoint'. They don't want to be in complete isolation. That's why every VR demo shown so far in public events always featured separate TV feed. Oculus and PSVR have dedicated processing box for making that TV feed happen. I don't know what Vive does for that.

I don't disagree. Rather I was trying to emphasise the silliness of judging the relative value a high end PC compared to a PS4 based on VR capabilities alone.

 

[hughJ]

Oculus and PSVR have dedicated processing box for making that TV feed happen. I don't know what Vive does for that.

Vive has the same capability that Oculus does - a PC with multiple video outs. All that's happening right now in the Oculus SDK is it's spitting out two sets of outputs, one via the layered compositor to the HMD, and a mirror to the regular framebuffer.

 

[temesgen]

And they're all just stupid noise at this point. May as well say consoles won't sell any more because people can play games on their mobile.

It'd probably be best if we just stop the PSVR competition discussion here as there's no meaningful consensus to be achieved. We can conclude with recognition that PSVR faces several competing VR solutions and will find its market in a particular subset of the total VR market. Views on how strong that competition is should probably be held in another thread if one really wants, similar to console company business choices versus tech and peripheral discussions.

The problem is PS in the title, as soon as you mention Sony or MS some people will twist to find every reason why its bad and other why its the bestest ever. We could probably have a more meaningful discussion if we simply listed specs and theoretical performance in the absence of platform holder.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

That won't really get us anywhere either because specs are hardly the reason why the majority of the markets buys a product.

I think it will be pretty straight forward for at least the next couple of years when VR will be addressing a relatively small market.

People only, or mainly gaming on consoles will get a console VR. People mainly gaming on pc will get a pc VR. I'm sure there will be some overlap but not much.

VR for phones will mostly be for people who are into gadgets but don't have any particular interest in games.