310°

Why PlayStation VR Has the Advantage in the Impending VR War

After using all three major VR systems, Editor In Chief Mark looks at why he thinks Sony is poised for success in the upcoming race for the living room.

Read Full Story >>
gamersledge.com
SaveMeJebus3030d ago (Edited 3030d ago )

Because it will be the cheapest and doesn't focus on hyper realistic graphics. Heard it before, but I don't disagree. I just want to try it already.

himdeel3030d ago

Install base is highest after PC. It might be cheapest VR after PC VR. There isn't another console equivalent. It should be the most accessible out of the box, plug and play.

I just want to know the price.

balth993030d ago

I agree, at this point I'm wondering if they wait until E3 and announce it's available today. I would make an educated guess of $350 for the unit and $450 with the camera and two move wands. Possibly as high as $499 for the bundle. I don't see how they will gain much traction beyond that.

Unspoken3030d ago

When did not focusing on better graphics give an advantage? Wouldn't the XB1 be more popular if that were the case? I don't get the double standards here which somehow removes all rationality.

zeuanimals3030d ago

You missed the point. Lower end graphics isn't a plus and it doesn't mean more people would want it, it simply means that it'd be more affordable. Of course people want something better, but it's all cost-benefit analysis. If you want something more powerful, pay more for it. The PS4 wasn't like that, it was cheaper and more powerful.

Unspoken3029d ago

Until Microsoft cut Kinect. Then the price advantage disappeared and the XB1 became cheaper, especially when you looked at bundles, than the PS4. Again, in this scenario it's more than just seeing value in the lower graphic setting that would increase sales and popularity.

We also don't know the price of the PSVR and whether it will be in a similar ball park as the Oculus.

zeuanimals3029d ago

No, we don't know how much PSVR will cost, but it won't need a $1000+ machine to run it, which is my point. I also doubt it's going to cost as much as the Oculus Rift as it's using a much lower resolution screen.

And the Kinectless Xbox One was the same price as the PS4. It wasn't until Holiday 2014 that they actually had it cheaper than the PS4 and I'm pretty sure you remember how the Xbox One outsold the PS4 during that time in the US due to this.

And it's not seeing value in lower graphics, it's seeing what people are okay with at what price. Lower graphics is pretty irrelevant and can be replaced with any other metric.

Unspoken3028d ago (Edited 3028d ago )

A $1000 for the full experience? What if I want less than that like the PSVR? Can I just upgrade a PC for $400? Or spend $600-700 for near full experience?

It isn't so cut and dry considering PC graphic settings are configurable which will allow you to adjust fps on the fly.

I think we agree with each other on the rest concerning value.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3028d ago
masterfox3030d ago

Playstation VR needs to win, cause is the only serious VR aimed for all consumers and not specific groups, if does win the market for VR will open hence the people will look for more VR products(Oculus, Vive, cardboxes, etc) to buy.

Neonridr3030d ago

actually PSVR casts the narrowest net in terms of consumers. You are capturing gamers. That's about it.

Rift and Vive have so many uses outside of the gaming world that cannot be done via the console. Medicine and Science alone have so many uses for these machines..

G20WLY3030d ago

Medicine and science can be done on consoles. Just look at Folding at Home on PS3. Technology has moved forwards, not backwards, so I expect VR to be no different.

As for uses outside of gaming, do you really think that Sony - more specifically Sony Pictures - won't look to incorporate movie viewing and even potentially VR movies?

Even if it was just for gaming, PS4 will have sold at least 40 million units by the time PSVR is released. That's a pretty big install base and you have the benefit of consistent hardware creating consistent experiences. Dev's are all over the PSVR for those very reasons, so the platform selling games will surely follow.

Neonridr3030d ago (Edited 3030d ago )

@jwilj2k4 - cool, I didn't know that. It says Sony collaborated with them, so hard to say who approached who in regards to that.

I am merely suggesting that PC platforms are a little more open and offer so many alternatives. Yes, some of this stuff can be done on a PS4, but it isn't necessarily practical to be tied to a console vs a PC that could at least be mobile / portable.

oh and NASA works with Oculus too..

https://www.youtube.com/wat...

Neonridr3030d ago

@G20WLY - regardless of how many PS4 owners there are, that does not mean you have that size of an install base. It means you have that large of a potential customer base. Let's face it, I would be surprised if 5% of PS4 owners jump on VR.

DashArrivals3030d ago (Edited 3030d ago )

You're forgetting the 'plug and play' aspect. Just say a normal person wants VR. It will be so easy for them to buy a PS4 and a PSVR and just start playing within 15 minutes easily.

If the experience it great, and we hear it most certainly is, then casuals will jump on and want the experience. REmember the Wii, that grabbed loads of gamers, but also casuals as well. The Wii tech is dead now, but it had nowhere to go. VR is just at the beginning. I really feel you're wrong with your predictions.

When I first turned on my PS4 I was surprised at just how easy it was to set up and how fast. A moron could get the thing working and start playing games. A moron couldn't just decide to start playing VR on a PC.

Neonridr3030d ago

regardless if you share my opinion or not, I feel they all need to be successful in order to survive. If Rift/Vive fail, a significant portion of potential PSVR customers will think that it's simply a fad and won't pay the steep entry fees.

Besides, people on computers are more willing to spend money on accessories and peripherals. You think a console casual gamer is going to be told that they have to spend the same price they paid for the console for a headset that they may use once and a while?

Thatguy-3103030d ago

The thing is consoles are more mainstream. All you have to look at is how the wii pushed motion controls to mainstream. PSVR is to the PS4 similar to what motion controls was to the wii. If Sony nails it with a cheap price and good marketing then VR will be big.

kayoss3030d ago

@g20wly
"As for uses outside of gaming, do you really think that Sony - more specifically Sony Pictures - won't look to incorporate movie viewing and even potentially VR movies? "

This is a good point. Movies will benefit from VR, its like you're in the movie. However do i want a damn heart attack watching the Ring?

UnHoly_One3030d ago

I'm a big naysayer of VR, I'll be honest.

So maybe I'm not the best example of a potential customer, but here is how I feel.

I only see it being useful for 1 very specific type of game, and that's a game that is in first person view. I see absolutely no reason to play anything with a VR headset if you aren't seeing through your character's eyes. It's pointless.

This goes double for movies. I can't think of anything I'd be LESS likely to do with a VR headset than watch a movie, that just sounds terribly stupid to me.

I don't ever WANT any new tech to fail, so don't think I'm wishing for this to go south. I just don't think it has a chance in hell of becoming a mainstream and long lasting success, and an almost zero chance of being "the future of gaming".

joeorc3030d ago (Edited 3030d ago )

Like jwillj2k4 posted,PlayStation VR is being used outside of just gaming, but also Sony has concentrated on VR multiplayer gaming in VR. Which that is one if the things Sony has put front and center.

They have taken a aspect if VR being seen as isolated to be , not being that instead of being that with VR many see it as it Isolates the person

Sony instead has geared PlayStation VR as also a multiplayer VR inclusive to standard gaming.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 3030d ago
balth993030d ago

I think it has the most chance at widespread traction, but I just got back from a VR symposium where there were developers on the Oculus and Vive that were using VR to treat phobias via fear exposure, a second developer using it to remedy and treat lazy eye and a third for travel experiences.

I think the high end, really interesting development will occur with the Vive, because they will have a standardized launch hardware profile, whereas both the PSVR and Oculus will be a headset plus other things if you want it.

stuna13030d ago (Edited 3030d ago )

I think because it'll have asynchronous gameplay while one player can use the VR headset with either a controller or, 2 move controllers. Another player can use another controller or, 2 move controllers as well just without the headset. All the while the PlayStation camera can effectively capture and track all the components all at once.

If I remember correctly Sony did touch on the possibility of more than 2 VR headsets being able to work in conjunction with each other on one TV/Console. Plus in comparison with the other VR systems, Sony are the only entrant entering the VR space who have openly touched on the issue of releasing their VR set on the market and said that will be taking a financial loss. That to me is like Sony saying that they are willing to take a financial hit to ensure VR is able to penetrate onto the market as well as do so at a lower buyin price than their competitors. It's not beyond reason that they wouldn't be up to taking a hit on price, because they also took a sizable hit with the PS3 as well.

BitbyDeath3030d ago

Probably a pipe dream but if this revives local multiplayer then I'm all in.

Volkama3030d ago

Disconnecting yourself from the local environment by sticking on a headset is not conducive to local multiplayer. When you can't see or hear each other you might as well be thousands of miles apart.

IamTylerDurden13030d ago

Local mp can thrive with PSVRs asynchronous mp. Asynchronous mp is aimed at multiple people on the couch playing on the tv against the 1 VR player. It'll be terrific for 2-4 people and help bring VR into the living room.

Volkama3030d ago

Yeah OK that sounds brilliant :thumbs up:

Neonridr3030d ago

until you whack your friend in the face with a move controller.. XD

G20WLY3030d ago

I do that when I'm gaming without VR!

I don't like to lose.. X^/

balth993030d ago

Which is something I still don't know how they are going to reconcile. Or how they can accommodate for people who need to shed it fast for an emergency/child/etc.

nitus103029d ago

That is assuming you have a VR game that is designed for the player to physically move their whole body. Doing that invites litigation especially if the player trips or hits someone.

When using the PSMove on the PS3 you can actually move your whole body, however you can still see your surroundings. Putting a VR headset on can be very dangerous if the game allows the person to move their whole body more than one meter since you normally will not be able to see what is in the front, back or side of you.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3029d ago
jwillj2k43030d ago

I want PSVR to succeed as much as the next person, but we all saw what happened when two headsets were paired with one another at the PS Experience VR demo. I know I know, its not fair to criticize the hardware based on the software... but still that demo was shit. I am still upset that Sony allowed that to be the first world wide showing of PSVR...

balth993030d ago

I have not had the opportunity to participate in the VR portion of the monster attack game you are referring to that features the asynchronous gameplay, but I have been on the controller side of it, and while not something I'd play for four hours, is pretty fun.

My concern is how much of a hit can they actually afford, seeing as their entire company infrastructure (other than gaming) has been hit pretty hard.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3029d ago
Volkama3030d ago

It is in all parties best interests for VR to be successful, they're essentially on the same team. Even direct competitors like Oculus and Vive will benefit from overall growth of the VR sector, more so than they'd benefit from beating out their supposed rivals.

It'll be some years before they start jossling for market share. They have to create and nurture the market first.

Neonridr3030d ago

absolutely. If Rift and Vive fail, it will make it very difficult for PSVR to be socially adopted. However if they all succeed, it will naturally feed a healthy growth cycle to the VR industry.

masterfox3030d ago

lol what ? "If Rift and Vive fail, it will make it very difficult for PSVR to be socially adopted", is actually the opposite. ;)

Neonridr3030d ago

@masterfox - if those VR headsets fail and the public don't see the need, how exactly will that help PSVR if the public already has a negative view on VR as a whole?

specialguest3030d ago

It's silly how the article title mentions VR war. If anyone of these VR gear is successful, it actually helps the industry as a whole. PSVR, Oculus, and Vive are not at war, but are actually united by a common goal to get VR launched into the mainstream and thrive as an industry.

Relientk773030d ago

The support of many developers, large PS4 install base, and (hopefully lower) price really help

Show all comments (76)
70°

Pistol Whip is Alive and Well With VOIDSLAYER Scenes

Cloudhead Games has announced the VOIDSLAYER update for Pistol Whip, adding three new scenes in June for all supported platforms.

Read Full Story >>
xrsource.net
70°
8.0

Review: Arcade Paradise VR - Gamer Social Club

Laundry, cleaning and classic arcade games all in glorious virtual reality

Read Full Story >>
gamersocialclub.ca
Babadook725d ago

Should this be in the PC section?

150°

Sony Patents To Prevent You From In-Game Harassment By Reading Your Emotions

A new patent recently published by Sony wants to gather biometric data of gamers to track whether one is being harassed using AI tools.

Profchaos26d ago (Edited 26d ago )

I hope this is one of those patents that never comes to fruition.

I already dislike the fact you can pay a significant amount for a online service buy associated games and content on said service and get banned from that service over potentially a misunderstanding the bans are already handed out for flimsy reasons

I'd rather see money invested in a ban that simply removes the offensive players ability to communicate with unknown players allow them to continue party chats with friends but not with Joe blow on cod.

exputers26d ago

Agreed. Blizzard recently banned a college Overwatch 2 player who's dependent for saying "shit." Pretty harsh.

Profchaos26d ago (Edited 26d ago )

How rediculas really. You can't say a word that's allowed in most PG films and prime time TV but the game is based around killing the enemy team using guns, explosives etc.

It's just backwards.

just_looken26d ago

What your talking about is called block list

In 2006 a spaceship dropped of the playstation 3/xbox 360 i say that that generation was the last great gen with game functions/tech that has yet to comeback

Anyhow the playstation 3 if you block listed a id they could not talk to you in chatroom with either text or voice. But that was pre mind fucked 2018 when people were more human than sheep.

But hey gta 6 is coming out billion dollar budget without a single player custom character creator and without singeplayer coop off/online something saints row 1-3 had on the xbox 360.

z2g26d ago

Take my social security and bank account numbers too! Here’s a picture of my wife and our address.

phoenixwing26d ago

Cmon where's the pictures of your children. Don't hold out on them.

H926d ago

At this rate I feel Sony will eventually sell a room to play games in it where they can monitor your every breath

jambola26d ago

I genuinely get a bit worried sometimes when a friend says something that could be offensive In a party
Because I have no trouble believing some bans would happen when in a private party for saying something wrong

SegaSaturn66926d ago

I want them to censor erotic content by measuring my groin temperature so i dont get too distracted while playing black ops 2.

Popsicle26d ago

Terrible idea. Not only do I not consent to providing my biometric data, the potential for mishandling biometric data is almost a certainty. Positive stress and negative stress can produce similar changes in biometrics. Interpreting the precise emotion a person is feeling is not only invasive but could be easily misconstrued. I hope this never comes to fruition.

Show all comments (14)