Sony will reveal its Oculus Rift-beating VR headset at GDC next week, according to developers familiar with the tech.
This is kind of exciting. Looking forward to hearing more about it.
Aren't those expensive? Cool tech, but it better not cost a fortune. I'd want to try it.
Enthusiasts device. Not for Console gamers. For those willing to spend thousands on a gaming device
We simply don't know yet. Interestingly enough, the consumer version of OC Rift hasn't been priced either.
I can't wait to see this device because I know it'll be amazing. VR is the next big evolution in gaming because it'll be like the matrix where the world is wrapped around a person's eyes. Basically VR is trying to replicate the world as humans sees it. Next evolution will most likely be controlling a game with your mind. With sony VR The naysayers will truly know that ps4 is the future and the future is ps4
" VR is the next big evolution in gaming" For a moment there I thought I was back in 1992! lol. That was the last time I heard that line.
My biggest problems are: These devices are usually expensive so doesn't matter how cool this is out how awesome Oculus Rift will be, if I can't afford it then what's the point? Secondly, I think three devices well cut us off from the real world which can be dangerous. What if there is a fire or what if someone breaks into your house or what if there is some emergency of some sort? But yes, I can only imagine how cool the experience would be!
@ Zeeee I hear your concerns and I have a few guidelines with how I use mine. Firstly, I try to use it only when my wife is home. I've never had any epilepsy issues, but still you never know. I always put my phone on the loudest setting and vibration, and check it every 15 minutes. (very easy to do by simply looking straight down without taking of the visor) 3rd, I put the volume up to a level where I can still sort of hear my wife speak, so if she yells, I will definitely hear her. 4th, I ask my wife to please check on me every hour (she asks me to give her two thumbs up).If something happens to me while wearing it and I lose consciousness, or starts drooling, or some weird stuff like that, it wouldn't be too long before she finds out. Lastly, check that all doors are locked, and avoid playing scary games on the thing, it simply ain't a good idea.
$350 says my crystal ball
@The realness, that's because in 1992, consumer graphics tech wasn't anywhere close to where it needed to be for VR. We're there now. It really is the next logical step in gaming.
@frosty...so what is the excuse for 3D? 3D has been tried several times and it just doesnt have that lasting power. We were lead to believe that this time...this was the time it would matter and you know what happened??? it became a dumping ground for crap. Companies thinking they would make bank on releasing their wares in 3D as opposed to really putting in the time and effort to make them something special. It became tired...cliche. And now has been put on the back burner for many while still being released in some movies but nothing like it was a little while ago. the home VR market has been tried before and while yes the times are different but I have a feeling it will end up the same. Even sony went head on into the 3D market only to pull back. what makes you think their efforts in VR will produce a different result? Personally i like the idea but perhaps (as with 3D) the masses wont bite because of the incurred expense and having to wear something bulky when they snubbed their nose at even a pair of light weight 3d glasses. i agree that VR is the next step in gaming but it wont stop there. VR will try to be in everything and when that happens it will be looked at like 3D. nothing to really define the benefits but more like a company producing something that lacks substance and still thinking it will be a hit because its in VR.
@Irishguy95 - LOL, "thousands"? What makes you think this thing will cost "thousands"? Anyway, this isn't an "evolution" in gaming. It probably won't even be a revolution. Look at the history of gaming accessories. MOST gamers just want to play games; no bells or whistles.
I know Sony will make it as cheap as possible, at the same time quality, they learned from their past mistakes, espensive items won't have impressive sale numbers no matter how powerful it is just like the vita
@Hatsune, I'm a sony fanboy just like thebest of them out there. but I just can't see this VR headset being priced for the avereage consumer. It will be a pipe dream until it is affordable enough to be mass marketed. I just don't think that will happen this gen. Greatness Awaits an all that jazz..
You never know. I mean if the rumors are true about driveclub then its possible it is for PS4 and I wonder if a $199-$250 price point would be a great price for a low end version of it! You gotta make it affordable for gamers!
@ ZEE " What if fire break out while playing" why would you be cooking or smoking??? "what if someone break in" im sure you would have all your doors and window lock right?? "what if there is some EMERGENCY" how about put telephone next to you, lower the volume in VR speakers enough said. p.s. would not be surprised if next gen. console only be PS5 dualshocker controller with VR visor. all around,anywhere,anytime portable gaming system.
From the looks of the patent pictures Sony submitted, Move remotes will attach to it for head tracking. This seems like a smart move to me(no pun intended). This makes it ffordable for me. I have several move remotes fron my PS3, I bought the camera for my ps4 because the same PS3 move remotes are compatible with the PS4. So theoretically all Sony has to sell me is a headmounted display, The move remotes have the tracking balls, gyros, accelerometers, etc. Maybe $299?
Price is the factor here. I am extremely excited, but I think $249 will have to be the magic price point for me.
lots of people spend 200 just on headsets, can you imagine if this was 250-350? HD screens and surround sound?? pretty much worth it up to 400 i'd say... replaces a tv after all...
"it represents virtual reality gaming’s greatest hope" lol it only takes sony to do it, forget the others that doing it right now. i believe it when i see it. no need for me to get hyped up for something when other vr devs thats actually working on key issues havent commented on how sonys so called vr is. and suddenly money is no option for the sony fanboys on here. before around $250 was too much. how much people talk about how much the cost of things are on here, now it changes again. mp, vr, hardware period, it keep on flipping.
Right. The others that are doing it right now have brought home a consumer solution to VR at an affordable level? If Sony is the first to do so, then they can change the course of gaming in the future. Or they can fall flat on their face like so many efforts in the past by many companies. Same with 3D. Same with motion control. I never would have guessed in a million years that Nintendo would be so successful with motion control after their abysmal attempt at it with the power glove. Often times, creating something just isn't enough. If you can't sell it to the customer what's the point. Apple made smartphones what they are, because they were the first to be able to make it a mainstream thing. Who's to say Sony can't do the same for VR? Occulus rift is great so far, but outside of the hardcore, who knows about it? Sony has the name and the muscle to make it mainstream. Also, I can't speak for others, but if this comes out more than $300, expect it to fall flat on release. $300 is feasible if it has significant support and compelling software.
Still worrying bout the price tag if its 1,200$ don't think anyone can afford it unless your rich or a spoiled brat.
Or you know....have a job!? Rice spoilt brat. Gaming is expensive! End of story.
I'm really looking forward tk gaming moving into this direction and really hope that it catches on because the possibilities are fantastic, there is really a chance to push gaming further and make this gen an amazing one.
I have the current one from Sony, the HMZ-T1 and it is a great concept. I'm hoping for 2 things if this rumor is true. 1st, I'm hoping that this new device is at most 1/3 of the price I paid for the HMZ-T1 which was $900.00 after taxes. So a $250.00 price point would be perfect in my opinion. Secondly, I would hope that the PS Vita is able to somehow be compatible with this device. Or at least, hopefully have a wireless version compatible with the PS4. I currently use mine the most when my wife wants me to be in bed (can't sleep sometimes). I just normally bring my PS3/PS4 to the room and hook it up. There's nothing quite like lying down and looking up to find that your entire ceiling is now a huge ass screen, plus Surround Sound...! OH also... Word of advice: DO NOT EVER play Outlast using this device....EVER!!!!
I agree with the price of $250.00 or very similar . They can't charge anymore than that . I'm gonna call it right now . The visor will have a light on it similar to the one on ds4 . It will need the camera to track your head movement. To get the best sound available for it , it will use the new Sony gold wireless headset . By having the separate item's already , it doesn't look bad when Sony sell the visor alone for 250.00 !! .
Off topic: I can imagine your wife waking up when you scream in terror! "Honey, did you have a nightmare??!" and she looks at you and screams when she sees you having a glowing headset on :D I'm fond of HMZ-T1 concept. I travel a lot, so that would be great with decent set of headphones on a train or plane. Vita is the bare minimum I need to stand long traveling hours. Although, I guess I would feel a bit awkward having a set on in public, though. Someone might steal it or break it. Plus I can't see my surroundings or look at my schedule etc. Maybe there is a system that reminds you that you have to stop watching/playing and need to get off at your stop or something? Flights are ok, since you feel when you land (I usually wake up on landing anyway). Games like The Witness would be so cool and relaxing on a VR set...
@nitrogav I think you might be on to something here as some of the components that would normally drive the price up are already sold separately. @Sharp Haha, she's used to me having it on so she wouldn't get scared and knock me out or anything. Though she hates when I play online when I'm using it as I I get too immersed and raise my voice and wake her up. (yes I've been kicked out of the room before) Having used it myself, I wouldn't mind wearing in on a plane or anything like that. It does allow you to check your phone if you look straight down, and can still see the flight attendant if she comes to talk to you as you can look up as well see people if you're sitting down. It also has reminder that comes on every 3 hours to remind you that you've used it passed the recommended length of time by the Sony. So if you press nothing, it shuts off at that point, which is good if you've fallen asleep. I've had it since it came out and got it mainly for GT5 and Killzone 3 and R3 since they support 3D, and I must say that it was the largest and best quality 3D screen I could get for the money at the time. I don't regret buying it, 700 inch screen, and it feels like my private Movie Theater :D
@Cupid_Viper OMG, all I want now is to play Outlast in VR. That would be awesome scary!!! The 'Johnson twins' still give me nightmares 0.o If the price point is 250, and if there's killer apps, then maybe. I'm not going to make the same mistake I made with the PS Move, only for Sony to practically drop all support for the thing like a hot turd. If it integrates into the PS4 infrastructure so that most games are already/future compatible, then it would be a definite buy from me.
It seems to me that what you're describing is less VR and more of a personal head mounted display. There's nothing wrong with that, but to me VR is something more akin to being more immersive by having the players actual movements translated within the game. I know some of the concepts I've seen have a move controller attached to them, which I assumed would be built into the final product which could facilitate head movements at least. Is Sony just announcing a head mounted display, or is this a real VR solution in the actual sense of the word. If it's just a HMD, it seems that this is a terribly mislabeled hype campaign.
@ RainSlacker I get where you're coming from with the Head Mounted Display vs VR thing. But in my opinion, there`s very little difference between the two. I have tried the Oculus Rift when it was between demoed on campus. The only thing it had that the HMZ-T1 didn`t is that the ability to track head movements, and that`s really it. So while I understand the distinction between the two products, I also understand that how small the difference is between the two. I tried on the OR, and it was both lighter and a better fit on the head than the HMZ-T1. The resolution and image quality was nowhere near the level of the HMZ-T1. When I asked about it, I was told that it is because this is only a prototype and not the final version. Concerning this: "There's nothing wrong with that, but to me VR is something more akin to being more immersive by having the players actual movements translated within the game." I think you're going to be disappointed with the OC, because the only thing it seems to be able to do is simply track head movements. And this is not to fault the product in any way, but it is simply that a technology that can fully immerse a player's entire body is still many years away from us.
Thanks for clearing that up and giving some insight. I am personally not holding out any hope at the moment for this being VR in the sense that I imagine it, so I doubt I'll be disappointed. I can see an advantage to a HMD...as I call it.:) A friend of mine had one a long while back. It wasn't stereoscopic, and the resolution wasn't amazing, but it was more immersive than a regular TV. Basically made what is relativistically a giant screen in front of your face. Also pretty comfortable because no matter my orientation in relation to the TV I was always right in front(was rather heavy though). I can't remember who made it, but recall it being quite costly. To me even simple head movements could be OK. IT could allow you to quickly see around you in certain genres. One thing I always found annoying about FPS(or even TPS) is that you'd get hit from the side, and quickly turning to react just wasn't that quick or natural. For someone like me, as I'm approaching 40 and my eyes aren't as good as they used to be, this can kill a game. Killzone:SF for instance, I had a hard time playing as when I was getting hit, I had issues when turning being able to quickly focus on what it was that was killing me, despite having a fairly nice TV setup. Anyhow, I know this isn't going to be a VR setup like we see in the movies, where people are fully immersed in a world while in some sort of circular cage. However, I do believe that just the simple implementation of some head tracking(likely via a move sensor built in and the PS Camera) could really open up a lot of possibilities. Add in a full move controller that can render your hands and sight directly to how you're oriented and it would probably turn me into a FPS fan. So in conclusion, if this device offers even the most basic form of motion tracking, even with head movements, I believe it will be a step forward in VR technology on the consumer level. Otherwise I feel it's mislabeled. The only way I can maybe see it as justified is with the stereoscopic display which can help render the environment in a 3D manner much more realistically than a flat display is currently capable of. Otherwise, I'll judge the usefulness of the device if I ever get a chance to demo it, and decide if it's worth the price. One last note.:) I'll be really happy if a more panoramic type version eventually comes out which adds in peripheral sight on a much bigger level. Something that will make driving games amazing.
@RainSlacker I agree with every single one of your points man. Especially with the panoramic view you mentioned. I've always wanted a set up with panoramic view, and I went crazy when I saw the first Curved-Screen tv. Of course nothing came of it as far a gaming is concerned. I was hoping that next gen would introduce us to a different way of playing, maybe coming up with a system that is much more intuitive and were peripherals play bigger roles. And I also though that 3D would also help with that in a way, but a man can dream right... lol
Possible day one purchase! I've been waiting for a device like this for my console of choice for years.
This is still just a rumor. It does seem very likely though.
Please tell me it's already next week! :3 Think there will be any game reveals or extended gameplay (I'm looking at you The Order)?
I hope drive club uses it if it exists. Price>Support>Fuctional
Assuming Sony's VR headset does exist, it would be very smart for #Driveclub to be a day one game for it. Honestly, if I were Sony, I would bundle #Driveclub with the headset to try to drive sales. Cockpit games seem like the perfect fit for a VR headset.
Sony would do well to bundle a game with. For 250buck with Drive club or say Killzone:SF bundles with it, I can see it as a very good proposition. I still think it will see only a small take-up. I mean keeps have only just shelled out 400buck for the PS4!
This could be a game changer, and possibly a knock out blow. The big question is: What game will they be using to show it off? (I'll keep my fingers crossed for an X-Wing vs TIE figher remake)
I'm thinking Driveclub. Oh wouldn't it be nice if they make a new Warhawk that uses it? :3
you just had to say it Hahahaha!
With the word "driving" in the slogan, it sound like Driveclub, but I wish for No Man's Sky. Exploring the Universe in VR = Best game ever!
No Man's Sky + VR = Take my money :3
Anything where you're driving or flying would work best, since the game is simulating a driver/pilot who is sitting in a seat, moving his head around and changing direction of the vehicle using controls. In other words, the VR headset + controller would be not unlike the real thing. Where it gets trickier is FPS games...it would not feel as natural as it would be harder to find the center point (i.e. where you're looking straight ahead), and while your head movement is natural, the rest of the body movement is still controller driven. There would be lots of instances of players turning their heads to look at an enemy, reflexively pulling the trigger, and not realizing that they are shooting 90 degrees off target...or, if the gun rotates with the head, at least not knowing which way they are running. For driving/flight/space sims though, it's perfect. It could also work with FPS games with a little innovation...say a button that automatically pulls your body into alignment with where you're looking.
I'm not sure what to make of this. I mean, Sony is smart enough to know that as cool as a VR headset is, it's still going to be a pretty niche product - especially if the headset is supposed to surpass the Oculus Rift. Can Sony make a VR headset that is as good or better than the Oculus Rift? Possibly. But can they make a profit on it? That's a harder task. I'm very curious to see what they have though.
If anybody, it's Sony who can make this a main stream product. How can Oculus Rift without a platform do this? Sony will have a platform install base in the millions and is known to develop consumer (price) level products. I doubt Oculus can compete - simply economies of scale. Oculus has to sell sooner or later - either to MS or Steam/Valve.
I love Sony as much as the next man, but, they tend to over-price their peripherals and stop supporting them like they forgot them. To compete with Oculus they would need to have at least the same hardware or the price should be <= to oculus price.
Still not sure how VR headsets will work on a console, at least with AAA games, the hardware simply isn't powerful enough as 3D halfs performance. With Indie games I could see it working, but still not 100% convinced.
Rendering trickery. Tridef 3D has a "power 3D" mode that renders a stereoscopic image with very little overhead. It doesn't render the scene twice like normal stereoscopic 3D, it just extrapolates that info based on the intercepted z-buffer data and separates out a duplicate image accordingly. Tridef's power 3d isn't perfect, you'll see some blur around the edges of foreground objects because it can't render polygons that aren't actually visible on the 2D image but it's otherwise pretty effective and negates the performance problems. If one of the big boys really commits to stereoscopic rendering methods then I'd think they will find huge gains in efficiency. Perhaps they can control what parts of the image can be extrapolated and just put the extra rendering into the small areas that need it. Honestly before these consoles were released I guessed both consoles would have this kind capability natively on the hardware level, so I was quite surprised when they launched and can't even do 3D blu-ray playback :)
With the displays being so close to the eye resolution isn't as important, like mobile phone screens, there isn't much difference between 720p 1080p and 2k screens. What you may find is like LG passive 3d tv where one line is sent to one eye and the other to the other eye that way the game is still full 1080p but split bettween the two side so the game doent take any hit.
The display being close to the eye is the reason resolution is important. Both Valve and Occulus have actually stated that a resolution of 4k is necessary to really lose sight of the individual pixels. Also bare in mind most of the feedback about seeing pixels on a 720p version comes from people with first hand experience, as the Rift dev kits are out in the hands of a lot of people. The native resolution isn't so crucial though, I have never seen anybody complain about the lack of detail breaking their immersion so it could well be that the pixelation can be masked with upscaling or perhaps some other super secret technique that they have been cooking up. I don't know, all I know is I can't wait hear more and eventually see it for myself :)
@volkama the smaller the screen becomes the higher the pixel density is, if you read previews of the new 2k displays on a 5inch phone screen people couldn't tell the difference between 1080p. Displays in a headset will be small than 5inch I would have thought which means even higher pixel density. There is a point where pixel density will make higher rez irrelovent.
I think a curved square would be better as because of the way we view the world we only see wide because of the two eyes we have. So 960x1080 almost make it square but evenly divides 1080p and gives a higher pixel density than 720p.
I'd be fully on board with the Zelda game (if that was ever allowed to be ported) If they had a $250 price point, with Drive Club included. I would bite, Esp. if they had a bunch of indy support.
Yes, 3D does half the performance of any game and in order to perform VR, 3D is essential and considering 60 FPS is essential for VR, I'm not entirely sure how VR will work on limited hardware (e.g. Console) considering these new consoles can barely reach 1080p 60 FPS as it stands. If Sony's VR headset drops to a 720p display to reach 60 FPS, I won't even bother with it. The Oculus Rift Dev Kit was 720p and you could see every pixel, it needs to be 1080p.
Im not going to bother making assumptions until I see a demo on hardware. I am optimistic though.
I know upscaling is an unfashionable term, but it would effectively mask the visibility of individual pixels and could be crucial to console VR.
But you could ALWAYS say that. There will never be a day that 3D games look as good as the best 2D games, because the latter will always be less resource intensive. A downgrade will always be necessary for 3D relative to maxed-out 2D visuals. It's not really a problem. It's just a trade-off.
I believe the console will have to be able to run the game at 120hz (60hz for each eye) in order to look realistic.
Richard Marks will be speaking at the event next Tuesday. You may know him as the guy behind Eyetoy and the PlayStation Eye and also said in June 2010 that Kinect simply would never work for real games. http://www.gamesindustry.bi...
Sighh they're gonna focus the majority of the conference with VR and I feel like its gonna be disappointing.I want games and release dates dammit
"and it represents virtual reality gaming’s greatest hope" .... you mean besides the Oculus Rift?
Oculus Rift will probably be a superior product, but if we want VR to work, we need it in a lot of homes. A lot of people and families don't have gaming PC that can run Rift. They have cheap laptops, netbooks, Macs, tablets and... consoles. Sony have a better chance to democratize VR if they have a reasonably priced quality product that can run on the PS4 than Oculus that (even if the price is good) need a powerful PC.
That makes no sense. "Oculus Rift will probably be a superior product, but if we want VR to work, we need it in a lot of homes." Well Sony doesn't have nearly the gaming base as PC. Last I heard there's only been 6 million ps4s sold which is just a tiny fraction of people compared to PC. "A lot of people and families don't have gaming PC that can run Rift. They have cheap laptops, netbooks, Macs, tablets and... consoles." So people that don't game on PC don't have gaming PCs you're saying. Gaming PCs still dwarf any console and will do so throughout this generation just like last generation.
I think something that the author missed is that a game needs to play at least at 60 fps in order to simulate virtual presence. The Oculus will have the definite advantage of being a PC platform that, in general, can achieve higher frame rates.
OR is a PC peripheral. Like it or not, PCs are still considered a hobbyist gaming platform. Yes, most families have a PC. No, most of them don't use it for games, and no, most of them don't have a PC powerful enough to handle this. And unlike consoles, families/friends don't gather in the living room to play PC games.
The hype is strong with this one. This is good for those who want to wear a head piece all day but I look at this from the same perspective I look at 3d TV I hate wearing my glasses so I def don't want to sit with a headpiece all day. But to those who believe it def will be money well wasted.
VR.....another gimmick that will go by the wayside.