A new PS VR patent has been published in Japan that shows the device working wirelessly.
Not going to happen. If anything it’ll be down to a single cable, since the base hardware will be powerful enough to run VR. What it needs is varied experiences and better controllers.
What's your reasoning for it not happening?
latency ... the least latency can cause motion sickness ... wireless high resolution video transfer without latency would be very hard to achieve
@zahdab No, it wouldn't. 5G is here to solve this problem.
The technology exists now, and has for several years, and it's already cheap.
If true this might actually get me leaning towards a purchase. But the other big factor is games. So far the only VR games I was interested in was a 7 year old one (Skyrim) and RE7. If it still doesn’t have games I want then it’s a no go.
There already are wireless VR systems on the market that achieve 1ms latency at 8k resolution. TPcast does it.
I play Vive wirelessly with no difference in latency. We're ready now.
One of the biggest points of contention for me in VR is all the entanglements. Being wireless would definitely get me more interested. And who says it couldn't be wireless? Oculus will release the Quest soon (Q1 or Q2 this year) and it is a completely self-contained VR system $399. Not to be confused with the current entry model the Oculus Go (also wireless and self-contained for $199). I don't expect the next PSVR2 to be self-contained (although that would be a killer feature) but I don't see any reason why a PSVR2 couldn't be at least wireless with the PS5 still handling the brunt of the processing.
I bought psvr with the intention of doing away with all my monitors. But the edges of the screen were too blurred, and, as you say, it's very uncomfortable with all the wires. The performance itself for VR was quite excellent, let's hope the console has BC.
@SegaSaturn669 Have you adjusted the psvr for your eye width? I had issues with blurring at the outside edges too, but then I found out there is a setup for individuals eye width in system settings and it made a huge difference.
Confused about the blurring comment as isn't their one fixed focal point within the lenses and you move your head not your eyeballs, to focus on new targets?
The VIVE is wireless..
not out of the box it isn't.
Base hardware is already powerful enough to run the hardware. The breakout box and headset itself dont do any render processing. There is already one cable to the headsets the additional cables are fired the breakout box for displaying it on your TV at the same time, and a USB to process the USB input. A closed wireless network of sufficient speed should be able to handle the bandwidth, the lag could potentially overcome if it's not running over a home network, but still may not be sufficient
Vive already has wireless attachment. No lag.
Not exactly sure why you've got disagrees, because logically, it will be a single plug and play wire. As far as experiences goes, PSVR has enough variety on it, but I do agree with the controllers, although thats a no brainer. If they somehow can have a headset be wireless without the cost going through the roof, then fair enough. We'll see, but I wouldnt count on it.
I can live with that. Bring on wireless for PS5. After Oculus Quest coming out this year, Hololens 2 as well, it shows that wireless headsets are possible. If 60GHZ can be pushed at short range, and an image displayed as the patent seems to imply, I think it could work. It's not like the PSVR2 is going to be played in another room away from PS5. They'll be in the same room logically. And with new controllers with analog sticks, just dandy. Even 3 to 4 hours of gamer play would be acceptable by the time PSVR2 comes out with hopefully, opitional plug in cable to the console for extended play and charging.
Oculus Quest and HoloLens 2 are standalone though. That's why they work. If you wirelessly stream the image to the VR headset that introduces latency. That will absolutely cause motion sickness. If Sony can somehow fix the latency, great. But that's hard to imagine considering the limitations of the tech that's available. The way it's done on PC, which still has very noticeable latency, is by using a weird router set-up that's dedicated to your VR. It really doesn't work that well, and it's not very intuitive.
Sony does it better.
Sony does what better? What are you talking about? Sony aren't literal magicians. It's a limitation of wireless technology. Latency is not really something you can so easily make disappear. There is currently no way to make wireless as effective/instantaneous as hardwire/cable. I'd love for them to pull it off, but I don't see it being possible in the near future. I'd much rather have a streamlined cable set-up with no latency, and a front and rear camera for room scale experiences.
That "weird" PC router setup for data transfer you speak of was probably running at 2.4ghz with multiple pieces of hardware working in tandem....it works, just not very well. How can we be sure Sony would not implement some form of lifi technology? Include a battery pack and some hardware inside the visor and while being expensive it would double down as their next portable.
Hey pork, if Sony had a wireless solution and sent a 60ghz signal within 15 -20 feet, but the games frame rates stayed at or over 90fps, would there be any nausea if there's a blip of latency of a split second? Serious question.
If this story is anywhere close to true 60ghz wouldn’t be for 15 to 20 feet. They actually state in the story 60ghz would be for pretty immediate proximity. It would potentially go as low as 5ghz. Plus consider this. If the title is running 90fps and you add in a new technology that introduces latency when said latency occurs you’d lose frames in the process, no?
There would be nausea. Once you hit lag you'll get dropped or out-of-sync frames. It's really jarring. It's one thing when you're playing on a flat screen. But when you're immersed in VR it feels real. So anything that disrupts that immersion will lead to a sick feeling in your stomach. Again, if they can eliminate the latency enough so it isn't noticeable, great. I'm just not sure if that can be done yet.
If so = holy smokes
VR goes no where farther then it does today unless they can get the cost down significantly. Wireless will not change adoption rates if the device is still $199+
You can grab a used one for like $160 now...
I feel like it's a coin toss on whether they do wireless or not, it's not it'll be hard to do, it'll just be more expensive to do, but all other VR heasets are headed that way meaning if they don't, then halfway through the generation it's going to be the only tethered one out of the leading headsets, but that downside could be looked over if the unit itself is cheap enough. I for one hope they go for inside out tracking eliminating the required camera and making setup very simple.
I think they could. Inside out could work and have 4 cameras. Maybe 2 wide field and 2 narrow on the headset to capture the controllers. And maybe sensors to detect the direction or distance away from the headset when not in view. I don't know. Not a tech head but seems possible. I think wireless image sending is possible as I used to sell products like this https://www.amazon.com/Mono... And they have products like this for hdmi https://www.google.com/amp/... If only 5-15 away is needed, would be cheaper by then to send a high quality signal built in. And you're right. They'll end up being the only tethered headset after a couple of years. If I were them, I'd give the option for wireless and tethered because of battery life. VR is going to look and play so much better making gamers to want to play longer.
Well i mean Oculus and Vive are already doing wireless as well as a handfull of other headsets, the tech is already well established and works with little to no errors. Hopefully by the time the PSVR2/PS5 comes out (if they do indeed plan to continue with VR) it'll be a lot cheaper to accomplish
what i find more interesting is you didn’t find some way to slam crackdown 3 in your comment, i’m sure you could find a way if you tried, i mean, you have consistently found a way
*Off topic* Face palm. Hey if a game that has been in development for *5 years* and below average to mediocre it deserves to be slam. The same way I slam Left Alive. Only difference it wasn't in development for 5 years. What else is interesting is that you post 6 review articles on left alive but not Crackdown 3
Oh oh. Let me. Let me. Krib, instead of spending all that time on multiple hot garbage games like Crackdown 3 and getting the poorest reviews this Gen out of the 3 console makers. And, spending all that time trying to overshadow VR at E3 with Hololens, Microsoft could have been helping VR's success on consoles. I mean, if Nintendo is even getting their feet wet, Microsoft, one of the richest companies in the world, could have done something for Xbox one and One X. But because of their laziness, they couldn't even make games for all those 7 MR headsets on PC. What..Lenovo, Dell, Samsung, etc were supposed to make games themselves to make them a success? Instead of coming up with excuses on why it wasn't a success like this https://uploadvr.com/window... Were they expecting the Steam or Oculus stores to make MR a success for them? I thought they were "THE SOFTWARE COMPANY." When are they supposed to step up? 3 Gens from now? Glad I could help.
Somebody still has PTSD from the crackdown 3 purging lol. It'll be alright little xbot.
Couldn't care if its wireless or not, I know it will be quality...unlike that game you mentioned.
What's most interesting is that you are more determined to call out NarutoFox over Crackdown 3 than Xbox.
Crackdown 3 slammed itself..
I don’t want to entertain VR until it’s wireless. So this would be a start for me
You'd have to buy a PS5 - I can't see that happening. You haven't been the biggest supporter of the best console maker now have you.
I have a ps4, as i also had a PS3 and PS2, and even a Vita TV. I never bought a PS1, my bro did, and not a vita or psp. otherwise i’ve bought all of sony’s systems
Krib bro - you sound like the number 1 PlayStation fan. How can I judge you so wrong?
Glad you get to speak for others, thanks for being part of the problem.
You should be banned from PSVR2.
also, make it work without wearing gasses for people who need ones. either through adaptive optics or if thats too expensive make the device so that you can plug in lenses that fits the users eyes.
Possibly NOT because it will introduce more latency
Can’t wait I love my ps vr
while I agree it's possible, i honestly don't really like it. Wireless has one MAJOR downside: no power supply, this means the headset will need a battery. battery adds cost, adds weight, and considering it's powering a screen, a wireless receiver an some form of tracking it will have to be a hefty battery. if it's has a 6 hour battery life that would be good but i don't see that happening.
Chances are, people aren't going to play for more than a few hours in any one sitting. Vr can be a bit tiring
Anything is better than the PSVR setup today. There’s a breakout box and wires everywhere. Having that built into PS5 where you’d only need to plug one wire directly into the PS5 is good enough for me.
And hopefully the console won't be bigger because of it, because most people won't be using VR.
There's no could about it, it MUST. It's a barrier to most people and competitors have it wireless so there would be no excuses.
Wireless would be too expensive to implement out of the box. Makes more sense to do it as an option like the Vive (which works like a dream, but also $300).
Wireless or not, PSVR 2 is going to be awesome. PSVR 1 is currently the dominating device in the VR market according to the latest reports. There is already a user base for VR and is going to get better next Gen.
Finally, it's about time.... PSVR right now = have a nice trip see you next fall.
Hopefully next gen VR will have improved movement system ie no more point and click where you want to spawn or glide instead of walking.
i would settle for the thin cable used by samsung on there new tv's, i only got rid og mine because of all the cables
Cables dont bother me as much as the fact the headset has to be closer to the camera than I sit from my TV, or my games happily put up a message saying it can't see the headset, even though all the tracking seems to work fine. Had to buy a tripod to put the camera on, but it means setting it up everytime, and isn't as pretty in my entertainment center because the camera wire is not behind the tv because the ps camera wire is too short So, for me, a wireless solution, preferably without requiring a camera or at least one that can work when you're more than 8 feet from the TV would be ideal.
I’ll pass regardless because it makes me sick. I can only tolerate 3rd person games like Moss and Astro Bot.
Thats impossible. Latency would be a huge detriment of that. I prefer wired with better performance
I'm it tech minded tbh but I'd go with the psvr2 being a single cable rather than wireless but I'd certainly expect it in psvr3