Carmack is porting Minecraft to GearVR, and new game from Monument Valley devs has a good chance to make a splash on mobile VR with their Myst-clone adventure/puzzle game. I think there will be enough VR gaming content on mobile, but of course the scope of the games will have to be scaled down [visually, input-wise and tracking-wise].
Sony PSVR value versus competing VR solutions *spawn
- Thread starter eastmen
- Start date
Carmack is porting Minecraft to GearVR, and new game from Monument Valley devs has a good chance to make a splash on mobile VR with their Myst-clone adventure/puzzle game. I think there will be enough VR gaming content on mobile, but of course the scope of the games will have to be scaled down [visually, input-wise and tracking-wise].
Pretty much how I feel. I don't think basic specs or even price points are all that important or interesting of a conversation piece at this stage. The PS4, Vive/Rift are similar enough in specification and features that the deciding factor for most people will be the obvious ones like whether or not they already own a PS4 or capable PC, or perhaps the question of whether their PC is located in an inconvenient place in the home. Am I going to move my main workstation out of my pigeon hole of a home office and into a larger common room for the sake of VR? Probably not. Am I going to buy a dedicated VR gaming rig for such a place? Even less likely. Does a PS4 + PSVR in the spacious living room suddenly become a sensible option despite the fact that I have no interest in console gaming and haven't owned one since SNES? But really all the answers to those questions could change simply by having a very compelling killer app that justifies the added inconvenience and/or cost. Then you have the less obvious factors like physical comfort - there's been no consensus from those who have tested all of the devices which one is actually the most comfortable, so opinions are probably going to continue to vary as much as the shape of the human face does.
The GearVR on the other hand is an entirely different animal. There you've got a $99 peripheral for a very large marketplace of potential users that regularly upgrade their devices, and those devices have become increasingly homogenized as of late where manufacturers struggle to come up with value-adds to set themselves apart from one another. GearVR could be huge there. In addition to that you have the mobile aspect which actually lets you show people what it is. Despite having had either Oculus devkits now for two and half years the only people I've managed to wrangle into demoing them are/were roommates. A GearVR on the other hand is something you can readily bring with you to parties and such and people have no excuse not to try it. It also has a lot of room for social gaming once you factor in the potential of networking another mobile device with it.
I don't think Gear VR would cannibalize anything from the PC (Valve, Oculus) and Sony markets for VR. You're going to get a very different quality of software and experience. I think there can be a lot of great experiences for VR on mobile devices, and it'll probably do very well. But no one that wants to play big franchise games, or hardcore games is going to skip out on it because they already have VR for their phone.
VR on PS4 will be great value. It's still going to be a long while before mobile devices catch up to that computing power. Integrated GPUs may catch up enough on laptops and other devices, and they'd provide similar types of games, so that's more likely to be a battleground for VR gaming between PC and PS4. I still think PS4 is going to be a very affordable option by the time VR launches, and it already has a huge install base to build on. On top of that, I think the software will be very high quality and the fixed platform will allow devs to mitigate VR sickness, or other issues. They can give a very good first impression because they know the experience will be the same on every PS4.
VR on PS4 will be great value. It's still going to be a long while before mobile devices catch up to that computing power. Integrated GPUs may catch up enough on laptops and other devices, and they'd provide similar types of games, so that's more likely to be a battleground for VR gaming between PC and PS4. I still think PS4 is going to be a very affordable option by the time VR launches, and it already has a huge install base to build on. On top of that, I think the software will be very high quality and the fixed platform will allow devs to mitigate VR sickness, or other issues. They can give a very good first impression because they know the experience will be the same on every PS4.
Mobile VR is to VR what mobile gaming is to console/PC gaming, quite simply. Two different markets.
Not quite. Mobile VR gaming and PC/console based VR gaming are different markets. There is nothing stopping a VR solution from supporting both. A VR headset that has an internal cpu/gpu or is able to slave a smartphone doesn't naturally mean it can't support the PC/console market.
I would bet that a VR solution that supports multiple markets is more likely to succeed then one thats strictly tethered to the desktop PC or console market.
Last edited:
That depends somewhat on whether a device that is a good phone can also bee a good VR device and vice versa. Right now VR technology is still not fully mature, but already we have two major devices that rely on two screens instead of one. If further changes which a smart phone simply cannot encompass occur in future stand alone VR headsets, the difference in the experience may widen further whether internal or external processing hardware is used.
It'd need to have PS4 level performance to offer a PS4 level VR which to date we've basically called the bare minimum, wondering if it'd be able to produce clean enough visuals at high framerates to make it worthwhile. There may be crossover in the future, but for now they are two discrete audiences who'll be buying differently. Gear VR is not a substitute for PSVR and vice versa.
Ok, so I watched three high quality VR video productions and these were very nice. They are basically like SDtv but in full 3D surrounding you and you can freely look around you while watching. The app is called VRse and the videos are two documentaries and one CGI art production. The video about Ebola in Africa is especially impressive, giving you that 'presence'. I can certainly see movie makers being all over this, because it is really something else.
Edit: regular 3D movies also look really good. Shame that the iOS YouTube app doesn't support getting black bars to correct the aspect ratio, otherwise it would already best watching on my 3D tv. For this vid aspect ratio doesn't matter much and it looked really great:
Edit: regular 3D movies also look really good. Shame that the iOS YouTube app doesn't support getting black bars to correct the aspect ratio, otherwise it would already best watching on my 3D tv. For this vid aspect ratio doesn't matter much and it looked really great:
Last edited:
http://vrfocus.com/archives/22656/t...uality-than-vive-psvr-in-a-league-of-its-own/
A studio making cross platform games for Oculus, Vive and PSVR commented on all three...
Rift is higher quality than Vive (no surprise there) mostly for build quality and software despite similar hardware specs and resolution, and PSVR is said to be in a league of it's own.
A studio making cross platform games for Oculus, Vive and PSVR commented on all three...
Rift is higher quality than Vive (no surprise there) mostly for build quality and software despite similar hardware specs and resolution, and PSVR is said to be in a league of it's own.
Let's be clear, he's not saying it's technologically in a league of it's own, he's saying it's in a separate market (which is arguable) and thus isn't directly comparable.
The "Huge Install Base" in particular is a highly questionably statement. There is no install base whatsoever for PSVR right now and we don't even know at what price it's going to launch. It seems to be a huge assumption that many people are making that it will automatically hold the largest install base. It seems to me that there is at least a reasonable possibility that PC gamers general leanings towards expensive cutting edge technology combined with facebooks mass market appeal could see OR having a comparable if not larger market share.
The "Huge Install Base" in particular is a highly questionably statement. There is no install base whatsoever for PSVR right now and we don't even know at what price it's going to launch. It seems to be a huge assumption that many people are making that it will automatically hold the largest install base. It seems to me that there is at least a reasonable possibility that PC gamers general leanings towards expensive cutting edge technology combined with facebooks mass market appeal could see OR having a comparable if not larger market share.
Better to read the source and responses: https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/3mvymm/vr_developers_opioions_on_vive_vs_rift_vs/
There's no question that PSVR is better situated than Vive or Rift for the broad consumer, and it can't be discounted how important it is having the console's position already carved out in the living room where there's likely enough space to leverage motion controlled VR. When you look at that recent SteamVR survey it suggests a grim uphill battle for trying to establish a viable third party software ecosystem for PC that properly utilizes motion controllers. However many units Vive and Rift happen to sell in the first year, only a fraction of them are going to be used in rooms that have enough space to actually take more than a half-step in any direction without having outstretched controllers bumping into something. PC VR devs interested in recouping their investment will have to focus their content to the lowest common denominator which is going to mean seated experiences where you remain facing a single direction, and only moving your head and arms about (or just using a gamepad.)
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-YCHJCG32/
and specifically the space (inclusive)breakdown: https://steamcommunity.com/app/250820/discussions/0/483366528921496674/#c481115363874903705
Keep in mind that survey was chiefly visible to the hardcore VR early adopters - the average consumer might actually be far less flexible and accommodating.
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-YCHJCG32/
and specifically the space (inclusive)breakdown: https://steamcommunity.com/app/250820/discussions/0/483366528921496674/#c481115363874903705
Keep in mind that survey was chiefly visible to the hardcore VR early adopters - the average consumer might actually be far less flexible and accommodating.
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
Its a rather big assumption to say that consoles will have an easier time or better experience because a living room has more space. I don't think this is true at all. Around the tv there usually is one or two couches or chairs and a table. The average living room doesn't have 20 square meters of free space infront of the tv.
I'm not even sure if motion controls will be that important. There are significant issues with letting a person wander around oblivious to their surroundings. And yes, lots of living rooms haven't much space for movement either. My guess is VR is chiefly going to be stationary and controller based to begin with, with sit-down experiences. Platforms that can serve that audience will all be part of the market.
Also, Sony is the only one who has showcased the working demos of VR+4 player couch coop mix [godzilla in the city, cat vs mouses]. If they can successfully promote PSVR as a communal thing, they can gain an edge over PC VR solutions.