The General State of VR Gaming in 2022 *spawn*
- Thread starter SmooTh
- Start date
They raise some excellent points about the state of high end PC VR gaming now that Oculus is focussed on the low end Quest. Even if there are better headsets on the PC around the same time which aren't too much more expensive, it may be that they don't get the games to show off their capabilities unless Sony decides to go multiplatform for VR. Unless something fairly big happens in the PC space I can definitely see me getting one of these along with a PS5.
Sony should support PC VR(2) right out the gate, and capture those PC VR gamer dollars immediately, rather than later support. Hell, Sony could be the needed leader on pushing more high-end PC VR gaming experiences.
By PCVR2 you mean PSVR2 compatible with PC? How would they do that? by pushing the "build on PC" button? ;-)
Silent_Buddha
Legend
With rumors of HL: Alyx coming to PS5, I wouldn't be surprised if Valve made some kind of deal where PS5 VR titles would come to Steam in exchange for them bringing HL: Alyx to PS5.
Regards,
SB
It's a good article really highlighting the key aspects that make Sony's set better. I've always been a believer in VR, but what makes VR a gimmick for me is that some % of the population cannot play it without experiencing heavy nausea and headaches result in a prompt lie down session.
If this headset solves this particular problem for everyone, VR is an ideal form factor and experience not just for games, but for a lot of things. VR movies, 2D movies, games, etc, where you can experience the 'big screen' in a relatively small space and screen. I really do hope they are getting closer to crossing this barrier, but I largely suspect people feeling sick is a sensation that comes from a variety of senses that the headset may not be able to properly address in the home space. (ie, VR ROOM experiences you don't get sick because you walk around and everything is paired 1:1 scale to screen.
If Sony makes PS hardware to sell PS software, surely the headsets would sell at minimal profit or even loss initially? They wouldn't be getting any PC VR gamer dollars, they would only make it harder for PS5 users to get a PSVR2 and deny PSN customers in favor of its competitors. If Sony delays it, hopefully it's just until scalpers aren't an issue. Selling it to PC users eventually seems like it'd be smart if it encourages PC VR devs to develop for it and maybe eventually for PSN if they were previously PC exclusive.
Several reasons I can think of within 30 seconds:
- It's a niche market and VR hasn't reached the critical point where it's suitable for mass consumers. The hardware still hasn't crossed over the transitional point.
- They can partner with other hardware makers for the headsets like they do with PC
- They're finally getting their content delivery pipeline on track and being efficient so they don't want to divide their focus to a secondary market
Meaning, making PSVR2 immediately compatible with PC hardware, rather than some homebrew API which allowed PSVR to run on PC hardware.
If Sony actually supports first party VR gaming titles on PC, then selling PSVR2 hardware to PC gamers would just make sense on capturing those PC VR gamer dollars... especially, from those first party Sony titles that would greatly benefit from such hardware.
I think 1 is the only real answer to this.
2 they already had that even on XO but never supported them
3 different teams
To add what you said on 1
They was burnt on kinnect and tv, so they regressed to what they consider to only be core gaming.
Once they can give a good lightweight wireless experience and its not a niche they'll support it on console.
They are waiting for their hololens tech to get cheap enough. LOL.
But seriously they recently announced a contract with the US army that can potentially be worth $22 billion over 10 years regarding Hololens so I am sure if they don't care much about cheap VR headsets right now.
They are focused on xcloud right now; but I largely suspect it’s because they aren’t interested in the investment in the hardware to make VR good.
I still feel that getting sick is the largest barrier to VR and is the biggest reason it hasn’t exploded yet, and if you cannot solve the sickness issue, you have a very reduced player population
not to mention it’s total balls for people that don’t have good eye sight; need to wear contacts or have very particular goggles that don’t press on glasses.
Last edited:
snc
Veteran
Wearing glasses is problematic for vr but contacts ?
Lol, just realized I put a comma where I should have put a semi colon.
Contacts are good. Just not good if you don’t own them, or if you don’t want to wear them. Ie: exhausted after a long days of work of already wearing them.
eye spacing has a minor role in fit as well.
I love VR (though I get sick unless it’s VR ROOM) but It’s honestly a hard problem to crack for all players with so many different physical challenges to solve with respect to the player. There’s no doubt there is a large group of people that can use a standard setup, but outside that group it’s a bigger challenge to ensure the experience is good for them as well.
Last edited:
Just to give a glimpse of a number. Kinect 1 sold about 19-20m units and it flopped (yes it was also the software-problem).
VR is (altogether) <10m units and normally games are not really compatible to be sold to just play them with a controller (it just doesn't work great). So you must produce a game with a high invest for a market with just a few million potential customers. That is a high risk. If sony actually drops BC, they more or less reset that niche market. That wouln't be a good thing (less customers).
Also MS also makes games for the PC. If they make games for VR, they split up again their development power. That wouldn't really be good.
They have focused on HoloLens, which can at least be used for the business sector. A pure VR headset isn't that good in that sector. HoloLens quite expensive but at least it sells quite well in that business sector.
Btw, am I the only one who thinks that putting a motor in a VR headset is a really good way to get a headache? The head is extremly vulnerabel for small shakes. That can really lead to many long term problems. I really don't think this is a good idea there.
The screen resolution might be a bit to high to be really useful. steady 90-110 fps at ~4k combined is a bit to much for the console. Yes they can always upscale, but maybe they could reduce screen resolution a bit to save at the parts.
My bigger problem is, the HDMI2.1 signal (about 4k/120 + HDR and I guess 10bit color). Seems to be much for a usb-c port.
Ok guys i see why ms wont invest in the tech for gaming anytime soon. For me personally i dont really see much value in VR, the graphics are always going to have to be paired back compared to non-vr games, which defeats the point of next-gen to me then if i get ps4/last gen gfx (though in vr).
Its a cool tech and Alyx was amazing, but thats the only vr game i liked and there wont be that many more unless valve does a hl3 in vr or something.
I have a reverb g2 for DCS but thats a different type of entertainment (and no its not a true sim either).
Its a cool tech and Alyx was amazing, but thats the only vr game i liked and there wont be that many more unless valve does a hl3 in vr or something.
I have a reverb g2 for DCS but thats a different type of entertainment (and no its not a true sim either).
Graphics aren’t everything in VR. They don’t need to be, because you actually feel like you are there. It’s more than competent at making a person feel fully immersed without needing to look like a movie.
Similar threads
