Sony VR Headset/Project Morpheus/PlayStation VR

[MrFox]

It is about the scan out, not the render.

Unstable frame rate on the rendering side causes discomfort, which is what they mean with the word "mostly".

They said 60 to 120 feels very close to native 120, depending on the game design. Why would they say such a thing if it wasn't true?

 

[eastmen]

They aren't talking about that at all. He talks about frame rate not scan out. The scan out stuff was previous to this.
He is specific that targeting 60 fps will cause discomfort and you should target 90 or a 120 fps.

Prediction talk ends at 29:10 and they move to a new objective high frame rate. He says if you have a triple a experience you may say to yourself that a 120fps is setting the bar high. If you drop frames it can cause serious discover , mostly 60fps is not good enough , solid 60 is minimum. He talks about the ms per frame so you need less than 15ms or less to hit 60fps. Oh and rendering at 60 may cause discomfort so we sugest you hit at least 90 if not 120.

 

[MrFox]

It depends on the game design. Reprojection have issues with fast in game velocities.

 

[Arwin]

Are you sure he doesn't just justify why reprojection is necessary on top of 60fps? (Haven't watched yet)

 

[Clukos]

Screens from the unit from a user at reddit:

His post includes some impressions from 3+ hours of use: https://www.reddit.com/r/PS4/comments/3vy9dy/i_spent_3_hours_in_the_playstation_vr_at_psx_here/

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Also I know you guys like to cheer lead for Sony but even they are recommending 90and 120 fps . At the 30 minute mark they say mostly 60fps is not good enough and solid 60fps is the bare minimum . Rendering at 60fps is most likely going to cause discomfort.

Context! That's a quick overview prepping devs for the requirements of their renderer, structured as a series of accumulated problems and followed at 34 minutes with solutions. So 60 fps, the high bar for current console games, is highlighted as not good enough for VR, setting devs up to worry about how on earth they can render a game at 90 or 120 Hz. At 35 minutes he starts talking about reprojection and goes on to say 60 Hz reprojected to 120 can feel very close to 120 Native depending on how your game is designed, allowing devs to breathe a sigh of relief that the 60 Hz bar isn't unusable as first said depending on the game. At 40 minutes he goes into a direct comparison between 60 > 120 and 120 native, detailing that render choice depends on game type. Fast games will be better off with simple visuals, IQ up the wazoo, and faster drawing. Slower games wanting eye candy will work with 60 Hz reprojected.

 

[Clukos]

I tried VR at 60, it's not that bad. It's just that higher refresh rates provide better response time which is key if you don't want to make the user have headaches from motion sickness. I still haven't tried PSVR but i'd expect them to do something to reduce input lag if they haven't done that already.

 

[orangpelupa]

the headset input lag/movement lag should be minimal but the PS Move input lag is limited by the bluetooth protocol they used right?

Except if Sony fiddled with PSMoe bluetooth and make it use non-standard stuff when working in "Morpheus Mode".

 

[jlippo]

I tried VR at 60, it's not that bad. It's just that higher refresh rates provide better response time which is key if you don't to make the user have headaches from motion sickness. I still haven't tried PSVR but i'd expect them to do something to reduce input lag if they haven't done that already.

The reprojection is their solution for input lag. (re-projects the head location/direction for every frame.)

 

[DieH@rd]

They said 60 to 120 feels very close to native 120, depending on the game design. Why would they say such a thing if it wasn't true?

It is very close to native 120 for response times, both real and reprojected frames use the latest tracking data, so user gets "smooth and fast" response to his head movement.

 

[MrFox]

What's this, a PS4 for ants?

It looks less than 7 inches. It's weird that they have to use two connectors that join into a single cable.

 

[Karamazov]

So they did not announce a release date at PSX, does that mean it won't be coming before next christmas ? Was hoping for a summer release TBH.

 

[scf]

yosp said PSX was about smaller/indie games. So maybe the absence of release date announcement doesn't mean it won't be released soon.

 

[DieH@rd]

Brad from GiantBomb was very impressed with Golem. In the latest podcast he said visuals were excellent [UE4 PSVR exclusive] and most notably, control scheme enabled him to traverse inside first person game [while sitting!] without any issues. He even said game supported strafing, and the implementation of controls made it easy and natural to use it without bad sidefects [slightly shifting body foward/backwards to move, head tilting to strafe]. He even said that he managed to easily learn how to circle strafe.

edit - VR talk in that episode starts at ~1hr 7min 20s mark
http://www.giantbomb.com/podcasts/giant-bombcast-12082015/1600-1437/

VR Focus also reports that PSX featured upgraded PSVR screen over the units that were present few weeks back PGW. Sony upgraded performance of black levels, and Sony is still optimizing entire unit for eventual [near] arrival of mass production.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

How do you improve black levels on OLED??

 

[Deleted member 11852]

How do you improve black levels on OLED??

By preventing light bleed from neighbouring pixels and reflections from external sources. The former generally isn't a huge problem except where you have thin bands of black and light bright colours.

 

[eastmen]

Context! That's a quick overview prepping devs for the requirements of their renderer, structured as a series of accumulated problems and followed at 34 minutes with solutions. So 60 fps, the high bar for current console games, is highlighted as not good enough for VR, setting devs up to worry about how on earth they can render a game at 90 or 120 Hz. At 35 minutes he starts talking about reprojection and goes on to say 60 Hz reprojected to 120 can feel very close to 120 Native depending on how your game is designed, allowing devs to breathe a sigh of relief that the 60 Hz bar isn't unusable as first said depending on the game. At 40 minutes he goes into a direct comparison between 60 > 120 and 120 native, detailing that render choice depends on game type. Fast games will be better off with simple visuals, IQ up the wazoo, and faster drawing. Slower games wanting eye candy will work with 60 Hz reprojected.

Yet at 40:20 they talk about Reprojection only compensates for head rotations , so moving camera or objects will not be reprojected , can be mitigated with matrix composition but imperfect and tricky. Fast movement can look like double framing with head movement.

At 41:45 he talks again about high framerates and to achieve it drop unnecessary effects. To also reduce scene complexity and use reprojection.

Sony also suggests dropping resolution but keeping FSAA.

Its not as simple as you say. Reprojection is not a replacement for native frame rates. Its not just fast moving games , anything with moving camera or objects can cause problems with reprojection.

Sony describes 60fps reprojected to 120fps as the best compromise.

 

[bunge]

Yet at 40:20 they talk about Reprojection only compensates for head rotations , so moving camera or objects will not be reprojected , can be mitigated with matrix composition but imperfect and tricky. Fast movement can look like double framing with head movement.

At 41:45 he talks again about high framerates and to achieve it drop unnecessary effects. To also reduce scene complexity and use reprojection.

Sony also suggests dropping resolution but keeping FSAA.

Its not as simple as you say. Reprojection is not a replacement for native frame rates. Its not just fast moving games , anything with moving camera or objects can cause problems with reprojection.

Sony describes 60fps reprojected to 120fps as the best compromise.

So what?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Yet at 40:20 they talk about Reprojection only compensates for head rotations , so moving camera or objects will not be reprojected , can be mitigated with matrix composition but imperfect and tricky. Fast movement can look like double framing with head movement.

Which isn't a problem in a lot of games. 60 fps is smooth as long as delta is small enough.

Its not as simple as you say.

Where did I say it was simple? What I've said is you can use 60 Hz for some games and it does work, in contrast to your suggestion that Sony are wanting everyone to target 90+ Hz.

Reprojection is not a replacement for native frame rates.

It's an option that can work very well. Most importantly, it's not completely useless and a total waste of time as you're implying.

Its not just fast moving games , anything with moving camera or objects can cause problems with reprojection.

All first-person VR games have a moving camera because the camera is tied to the player's head! If reprojection doesn't work for 'moving cameras', it wouldn't work for VR and would be a completely useless gimmick. Objects moving isn't a problem when the delta is small enough and the brain can't perceive the difference between how much has moved.

Sony describes 60fps reprojected to 120fps as the best compromise.

No, they describe it as an effective compromise. It means, by managing one's targets, a dev can achieve high eye-candy at 60 fps while still maintaining presence. It's not a cure-all, but it's also not an irrelevant option to be ignored. And this is proven by games using reprojection and users reporting that the experience is very good. eg. DriveClub is reprojected, and this report doesn't say it fails. Hence reprojection is not something to be ignored as ineffective when comparing VR solutions.

 

[orangpelupa]

Maybe his point is that reproduction can't be used to reduce lag and smoothen the movement