On those cases
Sony VR Headset/Project Morpheus/PlayStation VR
Eastmen didn't qualify his statement with any domain. Hence his remark was global:
And we know reprojection doesn't work for all games. And we know (some) games using reprojection that aren't causing discomfort.eastmen said:
I'd say its more in response to the earlier claims of PSVR basically being the same experience as Oculus with a 970. Effectively claiming that higher resolution and frame rate don't matter in VR because Sony magic.
Would be smart for you folks to keep your expectations tempered in regards to how well the PSVR keeps up with PC in terms of fidelity. It's very easy for Epic to say something to the effect of 'the PSVR is running the same showdown demo scene and settings as PC' or some such, but if they're also saying in the same breath that their render target is half the size then the apparent fidelity could/would still be very different. I realize people want to defend their fair lady's honor that's being besmirched, but honor be damned if it means losing some of the ability to be pleasantly surprised, and be mildly underwhelmed instead. 
The sort of games that strike me as having the most potential this generation are the ones with simplified, stylized graphics where they could maybe afford to throw 4x SSAA at it rather than the hail mary attempts at modern AAA quality visuals that have zero hope of delivering what the public expects.
The sort of games that strike me as having the most potential this generation are the ones with simplified, stylized graphics where they could maybe afford to throw 4x SSAA at it rather than the hail mary attempts at modern AAA quality visuals that have zero hope of delivering what the public expects.
How well PSVR performs relative to PC isn't really a matter of concern. It's a product in its own right and not competing directly. The important thing is how well it performs, especially given limited hardware, and reprojection is one of the clever ways developed to solve this and eke more out of the machine. It's a shame foveated rendering hasn't made it into this iteration of VR though.
With a large magnification, at least some of the foveated advantage can be used by rendering in two passes, with the center at high resolution (and lot's of AA) and the periphery at a much lower resolution (both matching their respective pixel density). This wouldn't need much more pixels rendered than the actual raw display, it would just need more poly throughput. And if they render all four render targets in parallel it would multiply the cache efficiency.
I hope that game devs aren't shy about using very (very) aggressive fixed foveation in the center of the image. I'd gladly accept 1/4 sample to pixel density on the most of the frame if it meant getting 4x or 8x in the center.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKR8tM28NnQ
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YWJyhA7-es
When you realize that the "foveated" region in those videos is something comparable to the FOV occupied by the width of a large desktop monitor, that's actually a very natural and acceptable region for your eyes to never stray from without your head moving to recenter them.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKR8tM28NnQ
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YWJyhA7-es
When you realize that the "foveated" region in those videos is something comparable to the FOV occupied by the width of a large desktop monitor, that's actually a very natural and acceptable region for your eyes to never stray from without your head moving to recenter them.
Last edited:
Prophecy2k
Veteran
With all the unsold Vita units sitting in Sony's warehouses, they can simply rip out hte GPUs and not have to spend too much fabbing new ones
lolupnorthsox
Veteran
Yep, and they may be under contract for more manufacturing. It sounds weird/funny but then its a pretty close fit to what they need anyhow.With all the unsold Vita units sitting in Sony's warehouses, they can simply rip out hte GPUs and not have to spend too much fabbing new ones
Prophecy2k
Veteran
Would be smart for you folks to keep your expectations tempered in regards to how well the PSVR keeps up with PC in terms of fidelity. It's very easy for Epic to say something to the effect of 'the PSVR is running the same showdown demo scene and settings as PC' or some such, but if they're also saying in the same breath that their render target is half the size then the apparent fidelity could/would still be very different. I realize people want to defend their fair lady's honor that's being besmirched, but honor be damned if it means losing some of the ability to be pleasantly surprised, and be mildly underwhelmed instead.
Like Shifty said, how well PS4 perfroms in relation to a high end PC in terms of fidelity is irrelevant, as most consumers won't be looking to decide between buying a VR game on either their PC or PS4.
Almost no-one will be buying both VR platforms, and so the more important concern for anyone at this stage is what exactly VR games look and perform like on each individual platform. If a game is rendered in pleasingly high fidelity on a high end PC and a dev says that said game can be playable at a similar fidelity on PSVR, then that is a boon for those already looking to pick up a PSVR headset for their PS4.
It's about giving an idea of the kind of visual fidelity users can expect to see on the more limited PSVR platform, because unless you've been fortunate to attend an industry trade show or event to get hands-on time with the headset, most folks at this stage have no reference point.
We only have the chirpings of folks on the internet that continually like to remind us that PS4 is a weaksauce platform that will only be able to manage PS2-level fidelity in VR. So it's nice to hear about instances direct from the horse's mouth that this isn't going to be the case and the actual results will see users pleasantly surprised. Even then I don't think anyone is going to start expecting PSVR games to look exactly the same as those run on PC with a GTX 970. So there's really no need for posters to feel that they have to nanny other's expectations.
Road To VR did a 25 minutes interview with Richard Marks...
http://www.roadtovr.com/sonys-richard-marks-evolution-playstation-vr/
http://www.roadtovr.com/sonys-richard-marks-evolution-playstation-vr/
do you know where on the helmet its located ? trying to figure out if a friends Christmas gift would be usable. The head phones have a large bulky rubber after the 3.5 plug.
Headphone plugs usually respect a standard clearance.
If it's really non-standard and doesn't fit...
http://www.mycablemart.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=3095
My point has never been to compare the two products as though they're competing for the same dollars in the actual marketplace. I have zero interest in the overall PC vs console debate - I haven't owned a console in over 20 years, and it's been at least 10 years since I was big into PC gaming, as I see the modern PC as little more than an expensive console with some assembly required because by and large they're all playing the same multiplatform content anyways. My take on VR is purely from a VR enthusiast perspective and from that perspective my opinion is that this generation of VR is going to be a niche product with limited application. On the PS4 it'll probably be a moderately successful peripheral, and on the PC it's going to be a money sink, proof of concept, would-be platform launch for Facebook's future VR ambitions. It(current VR, overall) is cool, it's novel, but it's not a full time gaming platform even for a VR fanboy like myself. If the next iteration of HMDs don't offer radical improvements then I would extend that to that generation as well.
If I speak poorly of the PS4 in any respects it's not to put you folks, your platform, or your prospective purchases down, and certainly not in respect to "competing" products on the PC. For myself, VR exists mostly as a promise of things to come where it's a mature enough platform to work without apology or serious compromise. When I contrast the PS4 and the PC it's only in regard to how the platforms are able to deliver my need for 'more' because the PC happens to be inherently positioned to give it to me at the earliest opportunity (and also happens to be the only readily available VR development platform to occupy my time in the interim.) If you've already tried a lot of VR and feel that its current form fulfills everything you need then I'm happy for you and we can have a discussion about which aspects of it or potential use cases for it you find interesting or compelling. If you haven't tried any VR then the kindest thing I can do is be clear about what I think VR is and is not, because I know what the reaction looks like from folks who go in expecting too much.
Last edited:
Prophecy2k
Veteran
I don't know why you seem to be intent on trying to colour this discussion as evidence of platform wars BS or fanboyism, which is evident by your language and tone (which incidentally comes off a bit elitest).For one, no one here is taking offence at your comments "bismirching their platform's honour", "putting their platform down" or other such bollox. It is you who keeps continually bringing that frankly quite juevenile sentiment into the discussion.
The rest of us here are just speculating and commenting on the realities and possibilities of VR in its current form. No one is saying that the current VR incarnation is perfect or meets their every expectation. No one is claiming anything of the such, because afaik, most of us haven't even tried it, but at the same time we're all wise enough and informed enough to understand the limitations of the technology employed in the current incarnation of VR on the horizon (which is something you'd have been aware of if you were following the thread of discussion). And folks here have been clear imho, in their expression of the fact that they also expect both the technology and VR experience to get better as time goes on and the technolgy matures.
If you feel the current incarnation of VR doesn't yet meet your standards and is incapable of providing a meaningful experience of any value to consumers, then that's fine. There's nothing wrong with that, and you're free to express your opinion. On the other hand, where I think you fall down is that you seem to not realise that people are capable of forming their own opinions and expectations regarding what they want out of VR, and I think you have a warped perspective of what the wider masses expect in terms of the visual fidelity of games that will be playable on these upcoming VR capable platforms.
By all means, feel free to share your personal experiences with the current crop of VR devices. I'm sure we'd all benefit from your view on the technical limitations and strengths of the various different options on offer. However, don't feel that by doing so you're doing us some sort of kindness or favour, or delivering us from an inevitable bitter disappointment; because left alone, us being naive and impressionable, we would allow our expectations to run wild and unchecked... (epic
)Again, we're all big boys here and can make up our own minds. Whilst I appreciate your selfless concern for our expecations, it's ultimately unnecessary.
D
Deleted member 86764
Guest
That's the best rant I've ever read!
Similar threads
