VRFocus reports on Sony Computer Entertainment (SCE) noting that PlayStation VR's biggest advantage is that it doesn't require 'complicated settings'.
"Customers can easily plug the PSVR to the PS4 and they immediately can start PSVR gaming, while I suppose our competitors may have some complicated settings required." That's a pretty bad reason when given the fact it's just a guess. The other two issues not being addressed are the fact Rift can be used on multiple devices and the added $949 cost for a PC capable of using Rift is as good an excuse as saying people that buy consoles need to buy a $999 TV to play them on. I think it's less of a stretch to say there are more PC's capable of VR in the wild than PS4's sold. I think Sony would sell a lot more PSVR's if they were natively compatible with PC and not made specifically for the PS4. Sony's biggest strength seems more like their biggest weakness.
$999 TV for consoles...What??? Sorry my friend but 1080p/120hz TV for less than $400 are readily available. A $400 PC sure as heck aint running Rift better than PS4 runs SonyVR...Rift won't even work on a PC at that price. SonyVR's biggest strength is that gaming is a hobby, not a necessity. And therefore people's hobby decisions are primarily based on their disposable income. And that instantly makes the SonyVR more palatable than Rift.
There is a theme developing. Less and less VR detractors. More people disliking these comments like this that are always negative about it. Less people giving them likes. Get where this Virtual Reality thing is headed death? It's getting hyped and people are trying it and loved it. It'll be unstoppable with a few games.
If you want something of a VR experience that is abundant, people have, something easily compatible ... cardboard/mobile VR is the better of them all. But, people front like only certain branded VR platforms/tech exist while "anything/everything else = crap", when really it can demand presence - given the right software engineering (despite obvious restrictions). I'm calling it now, people will buy more into mobile/cardboard VR than anything.
Yep. VR to PS4, will be like what consoles are to gaming. I mean, it's not necessarily directly comparable because you also have to own the PS4, but you get the idea. A lower-cost, infinitely more accessible barrier into the world of digital entertainment. Sounds like the history of the PlayStation to me (except the costly PS3). And that's why PS4 has the best chance of PSVR working for them. They have admitted that they're willing to take losses to make this more affordable, and they also have the juggernaut PlayStation brand behind them, alongside a solid lineup of games and experiences, that have already blown minds in unfinished alpha/demo form. Even the Google Cardboard VR does an impressive job of immersing people into unreal digital spaces. https://www.youtube.com/wat... This is a video that demonstrates that even the cheapest of VR solutions can reap amazing results. PSVR is going to be phenomenal, despite not being potentially the MOST impressive and immersive option out there.
Sony stated they will sell PSVR like a console. They stated this about price and profit margin. I found multiple sources that state it will be sold as close to cost as possible, but none saying they would take a loss on each unit sold. https://www.yahoo.com/tech/... http://www.gameskinny.com/0... By the time PSVR launches we will see an install base of 30-35 million PS4 owners. What do you think the attach rate will be for PSVR? Kinect on the 360 was the best selling peripheral in gaming and seen an attach rate of about 33%. Keep in mind they were also including Kinect with many of the 360's SKU's for about $100 more than the base console. As well as Kinect sold, it's pretty much been a failure and that is with some pretty impressive sales numbers. PSVR will be hitting a much smaller install base of PS4 owners and will be at a much higher cost. I don't see many devs targeting this platform after launch unless it sells extremely well. I don't see Rift having much brighter a future and PC has a much larger install base of users that can run it. Both Rift and PSVR will be approached like new platforms and finding devs to create exclusive content for either will be difficult since they will be passing up the much larger PS4 and PC only user base to do it.
Now why am I not surprised to find you here downplaying the psvr death.having a ps4 doesn't change your fanboyism I see.all we need now is gangsta red to complete this thread. On topic: What Sony is saying is that you can plug a psvr into a ps4 and you are ready. No graphics card upgrades No playing with resolution No playing with anti-aliasing No playing with frame rates No playing with textures Things like this.it's not rocket science.you don't play with ANY of those settings on ps4.unless oculus allows games to set up the performance for you as we know its possible already,ps4 and psvr will be easier to use.only core gamers play with that stuff.casuals will not want it to be complicated. we are not talking about sales death. Even though overall that is the main goal.
Being simplified is not an asset when dealing with hardcore gamers and new technology. The ability to make adjustments and use the device on multiple platforms would be a much bigger advantage. To be fair I'm not downplaying PSVR. I'm expressing my doubts over all VR platforms including Rift. It's a huge uphill battle all VR holders are facing, not just Sony. The biggest difference is PSVR is limited to PS4 which makes it almost a niche within a niche. If you have a mid level or higher end GPU in your PC you don't need to upgrade. As for "playing" with resolution, AA, and texture quality, what makes you think that is a bad thing in the first place? PC gamers aren't typically scared of things like this. The ability to make these adjustments not only optimizes your experience, it also keeps your hardware relevant longer. These adjustments make it so Rift will work on many more platforms. PSVR is fixed and only works on PS4.
1) Andrew House stated that the PSVR unit will be priced similarly to a new gaming platform, not that "they will sell PSVR like a console". http://www.gameinformer.com... The choice of words "a new gaming platform" is intentional. Slightly ambiguous as not to completely define expectations, but to give a rough idea. For reference there are several "new gaming platforms" priced lower than you're painting here, handhelds especially. 2) Shuhei Yoshida mentions "We tend to price hardware not to make money from it but to get as many install base so that content can be sold. This is the same kind of thinking in the way we are approaching PlayStation VR" http://www.digitalspy.com/g... You are right there in regards to pricing it as close to cost as possible - I misquoted that. But still, doesn't provide specifics. In the past, Sony has indeed taken a loss on their hardware sold, and at this point we don't know those details for their VR hardware. ------- Next up, you're acting like this company would ever do any different than designing a peripheral for their own hardware. As though it's abnormal. That's not going to change things. You might as well be on PS4 exclusive game articles questioning the validity of the success of these games because Sony designed them to PS4 hardware specs. And Apocalypse Shadow is talking about what has always been the advantage of console hardware vs. PC hardware. You KNOW this, and you even mention PC gamers in particular and what they aren't afraid to mess around with, but do you believe these guys are representative of the audience that PSVR is selling to? The point that this article outlines, is that PC gamers can optimise their experience and that consoles are more boxed in/pick up and play in nature, and that indeed helps as far as accessibility is concerned, as it has in the past. And the console that is dominating this console generation does so on a key strength of its audience preferring the more rooted and to-the-point gaming experience. It think this is where the idea is coming from.
Sony also stated that Playstation VR would not be priced to make a profit, rather, any profits would come from the sale software/games. http://www.pushsquare.com/n... "We tend to price hardware not to make money from it but to get as many install base so that content can be sold," he told Digital Spy. "This is the same kind of thinking in the way that we are approaching PlayStation VR." In other words, the manufacturer's trying to get the install base as high as it possibly can, with its business model enabling it to hopefully recoup costs from software sales.
"Shuhei Yoshida, president of Sony’s Worldwide Studios, let slip that Project Morpheus, Sony’s entry in the great VR race of 2015/2016, would go on sale for “several hundred dollars” in the first half of 2016." http://gizmodo.com/project-... Make what you want of it, but several hundred sounds like a minimum of $300. If it were less than he would have said "couple hundred". The PS4 camera is used to track the lights on the helmet and controller which costs $60 alone. Most likely we will see multiple SKU's for people that already paid for the camera. Move controllers will also be supported and those aren't free.
Death. Dude. Stop. It's trolling. I know you won't be marked as such- you pretty much never are- but that's what you're doing. 1. Sony said it'd be priced like a console. Does that mean a home console? A handheld? That could be anywhere from $200-500. For the sake of adoption purposes, it's an intelligent idea to rule out the higher prices. As for whether it'll be sold at a loss... http://www.digitalspy.com/g... "We tend to price hardware not to make money from it but to get as many install base so that content can be sold. This is the same kind of thinking in the way we are approaching PlayStation VR." Consoles are usually sold at a loss, are they not? 2. If you take PSVR by itself, that's one thing. But- as with console games- it's reasonable to assume it'll be able to play (many of) the same games as its PC-bound counterparts. Furthermore, there's the very real possibility that it will be compatible with the next PlayStation, meaning an even larger install base; don't rule out its use on PC, eventually, either. 3. Being simplified IS an advantage. Just like consoles- for which it's meant to be used- it gives devs a fixed set of specs to target, which makes development easier. It also cuts out the hassle for gamers. This isn't the VR of the 80s, still getting the concept down. You seriously ARE just trying to be down on PSVR. You've taken every negative stance possible in regards to the peripheral, and I wonder how many articles this now makes where you're spreading that negativity?
@Spotie, Your entire argument is based on what you hope/want to happen. Making PSVR compatible with the PS5 and PC would be a huge step in establishing the platform. Unfortunately we haven't seen any indications either will happen. We still don't have a release date or price point for PSVR or Rift. My expectations for both VR platforms is based on realistic expectations for each device. Your expectations are based on what you hope will happen. My guess is PSVR will be sold at $299 and $399 for people with and without the PS4 camera. For $399 you might see it bundled with a game. This fits Sony's statement that it will cost "several hundred" dollars. The only concrete "facts" we have are these: 1. PSVR will launch by the second half of 2016. 2. It will cost several hundreds of dollars. http://gizmodo.com/project-... 3. It will be priced as a new gaming platform. http://www.vg247.com/2015/0... Everything else is pretty vague. Are your opinions based on what is known or are they based on what you want to happen? I'm sorry if what we know and if my opinions upset you, but what you are saying isn't based on facts that we have.
PSVR and Kinect are hardly on the same level when it comes to their potential impact on the gaming experience. The fact that all the major players are releasing their solutions within a close timeframe will just boost public awareness. The potential market for PSVR titles is vastly larger than Kinect as they can be developed for the Rift simultaneously.
Looks like a majority don't agree with you death. That's all that matters. If people buy it? Then youre opinion doesn't matter. Virtual Reality is where the future is. Kinect would be mere a peripheral for PSVR. They aren't in the same ballpark. Kinect at best is a controller for this thing. Not even the main controller or a good one. Therein lies the reason VR will at least have greater success than Kinect.
Kinect is an input device. PSVR and Rift are primarily output devices. Out of the box PSVR will be able to track the helmet and your controller since it is tracking the lights on them. Kinect would be a much better input for either option since it tracks your entire body and can do skeletal mapping without the use of a separate device. You would have to wear a body suit similar to the body suit actors wear for motion capture to get the same effect. By design Rift and PSVR are only tracking your head and hands. You will still need to buy separate controllers for Rift and Move controllers for PSVR to get the full VR experience both companies offer. You are correct in saying Kinect and PSVR are different. With Kinect you bought the Kinect sensor separately for $150 at launch or you bought a console bundled with it for $100 more. The only other thing you needed was games to play. Without a 100% attach rate we all know how successful the device was. PSVR will cost between $300-$400 and either use your existing PS4 camera or the one bundled in the box. Controller options will most likely be the use of your Dualshock and/or purchasing Move controllers. On top of this cost you will need games. The unanswered questions for both PSVR and Rift is how much support will we see for a device that is being promoted as a separate platform to avoid the stigma accessories have. Kinect sold better than any accessory released and failed to attract support. The only thing different with PSVR is the label Sony gave it. We have nothing to point to historically that says PSVR has a chance to succeed. Outside of consoles we do have platforms Sony has released in the Vita and PSTV. We know how those both turned out. Neither received the support gamers thought they would have due to lower sales than Sony expected. We already know what the worlds largest third party developer/publisher said about VR. http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ea... If Playstation VR succeeds, it will be the first accessory in history to do so. It will also be the first gaming platform to succeed without support from EA. What can any of you offer besides hope to counter this? I haven't seen anything tangible out there. By all means, please present any evidence or proof to back up your statements. What are your forming your opinions with besides dreams and hope? I understand that the majority of you feel I am wrong, but none of you are showing me why.
Totally agree, not only the PSVR will be plug and play but it also has another major advantage it has the dualshock 4 that has the move controller capabilities built in no need for some extra fancy tech like the other competitors are trying to create to add more immersion to this new experience. The design of the PSVR looks stylish and comfortable, Sony also is preparing to have a solid game library when it releases so imo the only concern for Sony and the customers(including me) is at what price the PSVR will release, I really don't see any other concern other than that.
You'll have my money sony. Bring it on.
I'm gonna have to agree with Sony on this one. That plug and play, skipping all the complexities. A seamless experience. All the fine-tuning is already done for you. Just, "plug and play". xoxo
Plug and Play is one of main reasons why i like consoles so much. The fact that "it just works" is a big selling point for me.
Just plug it in and play it. It's very simple. That's the way i like it, don't you agree ?
@Two I don't ignore the advantages that more complex systems like gaming PCs bring. Like the ability to play games at incredibly high framerates, resolutions and detail levels. However dedicated gaming devices achieve a level of simplicity that just cant be found in gaming PCs. Nothing wrong with enjoying that. But i will build a gaming PC in the future because i love MMOs and RTSs which is something that PCs are excellent at.
I think that they are also smart by all releasing the VR platform in similar timeframe (PS VR, Oculus, Vive). This allows third party developers to reduce their risk by making their games for multiple platforms. This will increase the diversity and quality of games/apps for all the various platforms.
And it is also the advantage of console gaming over PC gaming.
I have a reality check for you: it will run like ass on any console. PS4 can barely push out 1080 30, you expect it to push out something decent on TWO screens at a high resolution? Not gonna happen.
That's funny I can start games around 2-5 seconds slower on my PC than my PlayStation 4, steam controller turns it on/off and into rest mode just like a console. They're both capable gaming machines with different features, but they actually share a lot in common in some instances like this. That said, Doodleburger is so wrong, and really hasn't done his research on PSVR, or maybe denies facts to prove his opinion. PSVR wouldn't release if it ran like s***, buddy, you and I both know it's a risk they wouldn't take. You still have to set up PC more ahead of time, but once you do it runs smooth as silk :) I like options, but I like simplicity, so I go with both and buy my games based on things like what kind of game it is and the mechanics, graphics, and features, console v PC. Looking forward to VR on both
Just tell me when. Im ready for VR already.
Just replace 1 word and that's been said many times before. Ps eye, move, kinect, 3D tv. Always a new youngan to sell a bridge too.
Except i've actually played with it, and guess what, its great.
I'll believe it when the Sheriff President says it.
No one mentions it's sheet to wear a football strapped to ya head. After awhile your eyes and head feel like they are working overtime. Like after a long test or driving at night in a rainstorm. After a few missions you realize, actually I could have been more efficient at beating that level traditionaly. It's a novelty circus act that the ps eye, kinect, move, and 3dtv failed at too. ...I've tried them all including GearVR.
I'm sorry, efficiency? I thought games were about fun here. Really didn't seem novelty to me, it's the real thing, but hey, speed runners might not like it. Explorers, those who like to become immersed, most likely will though. I respect you have your own view but you clearly have the wrong idea for what kind of experience it's for.
A system running on 4 year old, middle tier hardware is going to run VR games at a steady framerate? Nope.
There is an external chip included with the headset. Besides, its not like we havent seen it work. They've been pretty open about it. Its not like the launch of kinect/milo. Its running games and people are playing them. No complaints yet.
This has already been covered. It has a separate box and processor. Yes it runs. Those demos are of running hardware. On the PS4 already.
Great thing is LiquidVR kit & sdk works on all three of those HMD headsets. & with such a very well know game engine, working in PlayStation VR, and the other VR head sets, its going to be interesting to see what VR content can be made from the engines use in VR. http://www.roadtovr.com/amd...
That's good news. The biggest advantage will always be the games. Give us games and it'll work.
Im getting more and more excited about buying this.. I might get it at launch if they have a good game alongside it.. So many opportunities are opened up with this thing
MM dreams will support it so it is an instant buy for me.
PSVR day one for me. I like the simplicity of plug and play. I don't want to be upgrading hardware, changing complicated settings in order to find my current best performance. Naaah Plug it and play it just knowing that it will work.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.