Support NeoGAF

[Cthulhu_Steev]

I'm wondering if other people here are like me in that I would sacrifice gfx in order to have a consistently high frame rate.

So for example, I would be willing to play wipeout HD using current engine in VR with nothing additional added for 'next-fen' just so I can have that consistent 60fps.

Loads of us would be happy with PS3 (even PS2) level numbers of textured polygons, if it means a higher framerate and improved IQ. It's original Tron-style flat-shaded polygons that get me excited; games like Okami, Unfinished Swan, Rez, I Robot, Virtua Racing, Superman 64 and SoTC (oh boy, looking up at the collossi) get me buzzing.

 

[Triple U]

This is not a good idea at all. It's the same issue with the Sony guy (who I presume just made the this up on the spot) who claimed that the gap letting people still see out of the HMD through the bottom was a "design choice"

These solution's all contradict the attempts to produce presence. If sony is serious about making the sensation of presence its top priority, then those solutions are antithetical to that goal.

The idea of presence is to completely trick the mind to believe that it is in a literally different reality than the room they are in. The LED idea will lead to many situations where peripheral vision will now take you out of that experience, as is true for being able to see outside of the VR experience you are meant to be having.

This is the sort of stuff I worry about, both Oculus and Sony doing. It takes away from the goal of VR in the first place, and the experience that isn't possible in any other medium. I sincerely hope these are not legitimately considered as solutions

Eh, idk why you claim it's made up when it makes absolutely perfect sense. To the the degree that I'm wondering now what oculus' response will be to these challenges.

I think I articulated it well enough here:

This sounds absolutely awful. The entire point is to be immersed. Why in the world would you want to look down and see your shirt.

There's levels of immersion and not everybody actually wants there vision cut all the way off while they dance around a virtual play area. All one need do is read the horror stories of eyetoy/wii/kinect/move etc and see that motion controlled gaming can lead to injury and damage even with full vision available, it of course would be several orders worse being completely blind to the real world.

I forget which article said it but the inclination is that Morpheus is meant to be used standing up and moving around swinging the Move versus Oculus' approach. Thats a valid concern.

Also the line was that they are looking at ways to accommodate both the gamer that wants to be completely immersed and the one that only partially does.

Again man, I think you're expecting too much from the outset. I never said they could be carefree on not worry about what anybody else is doing. But its not a heads on competition like PS4 vs Xbox. They each essential have exclusive reign over their particular platform. If one company does something neat, the other isn't necessarily gonna be hurt by that, and can look at it and implement it themselves if they feel it fits what they want to do. If anything, Oculus has the advantage there because they can iterate. Sony is the one who has deliver a complete product that will be expected to be compatible with every PS4 VR title in the future. If Oculus comes up with something really cool, depending on what it is, there might be far less room for Sony to implement it themselves if they've already shipped their headset.

Anyways, the PC world is different than the console world. On consoles, yes, consumers will want to know that everything they have will just work and that there will be finished games ready to play. PC, less so. There will still be some expectation of that, and there will certainly be *plenty* of titles and experiences that will be ready to play just like on console, but there's also lots of room for experimentation, glorified tech demos, games in beta, hacked support for existing games/experiences and whatnot.

Sony is obviously full of incredibly smart people and I'm sure we'll see some cool stuff from them. I'm excited about it. I'm sure Oculus are excited about it, too. Oculus are doing this because of a passion for VR, not because they think this is a good get-rich scheme. They've gladly taken in tons of constructive criticism all throughout their development and have welcomed input from others in terms of how things could be better. They will be looking at Sony with great interest, because they know they can feed off each other and push VR forward.

But like I said, controller support is plenty good enough for VR at the moment. Its what I think the large majority of VR games in the near future will be designed to be played with. So no, Oculus do not need to be worried about Sony or that they aren't shipping a complete product. They'll have one hell of a product when the consumer version does release, trust me. I'm not sure why you're so insistent on trying to downplay that.


What are the limits to that, specifically? Seriously, its not as much of a competition as you think it is. Maybe a healthy rivalry would be a better way to put it?

I don't think it's expecting too much at all, especially if the alternative has this all in place. I'm sure the consumer wouldn't either. And I'm not downplaying the rift at all, I've already given it the edge over Sony's. Still, the sitting down thing is something I just learned this week and it comes off as jarring and misguided on my first thought. If you don't see it that way fine, but I do feel that's it's a very valid concern as far as potential goes and I will continue to treat it as such.

As for the second part, I thought that there were blatantly obvious limits to "friendly" competition from separate corps. But let me try to spell some out.

Say this was MS vs Sony in this VR race. Its still relatively early in the game for the HD era, neither company has a product coming out in a years time and similar to Sony/Oculus today, they can learn different techniques and implementations off each other as they have these presentations. You know, "friendly". MS having the software clout they do, decides to call a consortium of relevant parties to discuss and design a "DXVR" subset of standard APIs to aid in development of VR applications which seemingly would be needed at some point. They invite everyone except Sony. This move now puts Sony at a considerable disadvantage when it comes to software support on there system and MS knows that. Sony is now on the outside looking in and while of course they will have their own APIs, the balance would surely shift in MS' favor when it comes to games that might support their PC/XB1 headset vs Sony's.

Another example that is more congruent with the real world is how Sony has seemingly closed the door on Oculus being able to support the PS4, which is of course a major gaming platform and something Oculus has expressed interest in. Would it be any kind of death blow to oculus? No I don't think so. But I think it's a blow regardless. And it comes despite the "friendliness" between the two systems.

I could probably come up with a dozen scenarios of why "friendly" competition is limited but I hope it is obvious by now.

 

[J-P]

The original rumor was complete bullshit, this is even more so.

Except Demon Nite hinted strongly that Sony has put the offer out to partner up and so far Oculus has declined. That said i do think the original rumor was BS.

 

[kyser73]

This is not a good idea at all. It's the same issue with the Sony guy (who I presume just made the this up on the spot) who claimed that the gap letting people still see out of the HMD through the bottom was a "design choice"

How do you know this? You've pulled it out of thin air as much as you're claiming the rep did.

As I said on another related thread, perhaps for some users being completely enclosed isn't a comfortable or enjoyable experience? Sony want this to be a mass market proposition, so they will need to cater for a wide range of tastes and needs. The most logical thing would be to sell the unit with some kind of adjustable mask that allowed users to select how much they want to cut the world out, which would also allow people to increase the level of immersion as they felt better about it - maybe even for some kinds of game too.

One other thing regarding PC compatiility...while it might not be on the initial roadmap, which will I would imagine solely focus on getting this working with the PS4, that Sony want NASA and presumably other organisations to start using a commodity VR system, at some point there will be a fork to PCs IMO.

 

[rjinaz]

How do you know this? You've pulled it out of thin air as much as you're claiming the rep did.

As I said on another related thread, perhaps for some users being completely enclosed isn't a comfortable or enjoyable experience? Sony want this to be a mass market proposition, so they will need to cater for a wide range of tastes and needs. The most logical thing would be to sell the unit with some kind of adjustable mask that allowed users to select how much they want to cut the world out, which would also allow people to increase the level of immersion as they felt better about it - maybe even for some kinds of game too.

I personally don't understand that desire to be only partially immersed but apparently some do. I recall earlier this was being discussed and a poster was personally offended that others didn't think partial immersion should be considered because it's what that poster wants. Maybe it's because of claustrophobia? Surely there are others like that poster. Ultimately though I think Sony would be better off releasing fully than partial if a choice has to be made. Hopefully they find the option for both.

 

[kyser73]

I personally don't understand that desire to be only partially immersed but apparently some do. I recall earlier this was being discussed and a poster was personally offended that others didn't think partial immersion should be considered because it's what that poster wants. Maybe it's because of claustrophobia? Surely there are others like that poster. Ultimately though I think Sony would be better off releasing fully than partial if a choice has to be made. Hopefully they find the option for both.

It's an adjustable seal, can't be that hard to do

BTW - that poster might have been me, and it was less that I want it and more that I was amazed at the lack of empathy or ability to think about others that the person I was replying to displayed.

Me? I want Wipeout Zone racing with full on Jeff Minter psychedelic visuals in the background...

 

[rjinaz]

It's an adjustable seal, can't be that hard to do

BTW - that poster might have been me, and it was less that I want it and more that I was amazed at the lack of empathy or ability to think about others that the person I was replying to displayed.

Me? I want Wipeout Zone racing with full on Jeff Minter psychedelic visuals in the background...

I think it was you, I apologize if you mistook what you wrote. I think that you're right though and Sony seems to agree with you that others might want the other option. I do wonder why Sony went with partial though for their reveal. If it was indeed intentional, it shows they are giving it serious thought.

 

[Nzyme32]

How do you know this? You've pulled it out of thin air as much as you're claiming the rep did.

As I said on another related thread, perhaps for some users being completely enclosed isn't a comfortable or enjoyable experience? Sony want this to be a mass market proposition, so they will need to cater for a wide range of tastes and needs. The most logical thing would be to sell the unit with some kind of adjustable mask that allowed users to select how much they want to cut the world out, which would also allow people to increase the level of immersion as they felt better about it - maybe even for some kinds of game too.

The exact quote of the "design choice" to allow visibility out of the headset to accommodate those uncomfortable with being completely cut off from the real world, is in this thread. If it's true that Sony has presence as its "highest priority" for their HMD then that "desing choice" argument has to be false (and I assume just from someone that doesn't have the right answer, the same as the guy in the "tested" video claiming the HMD has "2 1080p panels", when sony explicitly stated there is only one)

It contradicts presence and the entire principle of believing you are in a different reality. If you can see outside of it, you are taken out of that reality. It's conflicting information to what your brain expects to understand the reality you are in, and it is impossible to be present in both at the same time.

This is well described by Abrash and many others. Removing the headset itself and leaving virtual reality to find yourself back in real world again is significantly disorienting precisely because of this distinction and the adjustments your mind has to make following the transition. There are already plenty of videos and presentations on this. VR operates on the same low level processing and vestibular systems that our minds do to perceive reality. Deviating from that is produces a mismatch between systems and is what causes disorientation and sickness.

It's why VR games can't force the camera around or turn you upside down because VR does not currently interact with the inner ear vestibular activity involved in processes that govern our perception of acceleration and rotation (gravity) - so far that is only manipulatable via galvanic vestibular stimulation at the mastoid processes (something that is likely dangerous in the long term and a long way from being consumer friendly)

I mentioned all this because Sony claim that presence is their highest priority for their headset. Taking short cuts, will make it difficult to use the headset for long periods without being disoriented of sick.

TO CLARIFY: I am not saying the assumption of a person being uncomfortable with being cut off from the real world is false, in fact it is probably true. However achieving presence is antithetical to being able to then see outside the virtual reality.

Eh, idk why you claim it's made up when it makes absolutely perfect sense. To the the degree that I'm wondering now what oculus' response will be to these challenges.

I think I articulated it well enough here:

There's levels of immersion and not everybody actually wants there vision cut all the way off while they dance around a virtual play area. All one need do is read the horror stories of eyetoy/wii/kinect/move etc and see that motion controlled gaming can lead to injury and damage even with full vision available, it of course would be several orders worse being completely blind to the real world.

I forget which article said it but the inclination is that Morpheus is meant to be used standing up and moving around swinging the Move versus Oculus' approach. Thats a valid concern.

Of course this is a concern, and it is why the standing, walking around VR experience is not solved yet. I'm certain Morpheus will be great for standing experiences, moving on the other hand (with the exception of being confined to a small square are - absolutely not. A successful translational movement tracking system has yet to be demonstrated with the exception of Valve's which is still hardly a realistic solution as it demands a dedicated room plastered with additional data points for cameras to determine your position.

The new PS camera is great for a small confined area but it is extremely limited in understand where you can go. An example would be turning and then having your controller light bar or move light obscured by your body. This will cause issues but Sony may determine a solution.

I think a distinction needs to be made from immersion and presence. Immersion is possible today with a nice big screen and great game experience, presence is the belief of being somewhere else while knowing that you are still in the same old room. That sensation requires being cut off from the real world entirely. As soon as you notice otherwise, you will be disoriented. The degree and frequency of this disorientation, I have no idea, but it could very well be like DK1 which is very difficult to use for extended periods

 

[kyser73]

The exact quote of the "design choice" to allow visibility out of the headset to accommodate those uncomfortable with being completely cut off from the real world, is in this thread. If it's true that Sony has presence as its "highest priority" for their HMD then that "desing choice" argument has to be false (and I assume just from someone that doesn't have the right answer, the same as the guy in the "tested" video claiming the HMD has "2 1080p panels", when sony explicitly stated there is only one)

It contradicts presence and the entire principle of believing you are in a different reality. If you can see outside of it, you are taken out of that reality. It's conflicting information to what your brain expects to understand the reality you are in, and it is impossible to be present in both at the same time.

This is well described by Abrash and many others. Removing the headset itself and leaving virtual reality to find yourself back in real world again is significantly disorienting precisely because of this distinction and the adjustments your mind has to make following the transition. There are already plenty of videos and presentations on this. VR operates on the same low level processing and vestibular systems that our minds do to perceive reality. Deviating from that is produces a mismatch between systems and is what causes disorientation and sickness.

It's why VR games can't force the camera around or turn you upside down because VR does not currently interact with the inner ear vestibular activity involved in processes that govern our perception of acceleration and rotation (gravity) - so far that is only manipulatable via galvanic vestibular stimulation at the mastoid processes (something that is likely dangerous in the long term and a long way from being consumer friendly)

I mentioned all this because Sony claim that presence is their highest priority for their headset.

None of this fine paragraph addresses the actual point I was making, which is that Sony may well have information that informed this design that being completely cut off isn't for everyone, and that the hit to the immersive experience is worth it for a demo unit.

No-one complained of sickness from being able to see out of a gap below their main FOV. It's not like it's a massive gap all the way around the Morpheus headpiece - and TBH you're exhibiting the same lack of empathy toward other people the poster I originally replied to was.

Why is this taking a short cut? I'm fairly certain that creating a completely sealed unit would be just as easy.

 

[Confidence Man]

I thought the reason for the space was airflow?

 

[StuBurns]

Sony have said they will provide presence. Maybe they're lying, but we really can't say until we get the unit.

 

[Seanspeed]

I don't think it's expecting too much at all, especially if the alternative has this all in place. I'm sure the consumer wouldn't either. And I'm not downplaying the rift at all, I've already given it the edge over Sony's. Still, the sitting down thing is something I just learned this week and it comes off as jarring and misguided on my first thought. If you don't see it that way fine, but I do feel that's it's a very valid concern as far as potential goes and I will continue to treat it as such.

As for the second part, I thought that there were blatantly obvious limits to "friendly" competition from separate corps. But let me try to spell some out.

Say this was MS vs Sony in this VR race. Its still relatively early in the game for the HD era, neither company has a product coming out in a years time and similar to Sony/Oculus today, they can learn different techniques and implementations off each other as they have these presentations. You know, "friendly". MS having the software clout they do, decides to call a consortium of relevant parties to discuss and design a "DXVR" subset of standard APIs to aid in development of VR applications which seemingly would be needed at some point. They invite everyone except Sony. This move now puts Sony at a considerable disadvantage when it comes to software support on there system and MS knows that. Sony is now on the outside looking in and while of course they will have their own APIs, the balance would surely shift in MS' favor when it comes to games that might support their PC/XB1 headset vs Sony's.

Another example that is more congruent with the real world is how Sony has seemingly closed the door on Oculus being able to support the PS4, which is of course a major gaming platform and something Oculus has expressed interest in. Would it be any kind of death blow to oculus? No I don't think so. But I think it's a blow regardless. And it comes despite the "friendliness" between the two systems.

I could probably come up with a dozen scenarios of why "friendly" competition is limited but I hope it is obvious by now.

The fact that you only learned just recently that Oculus were targeting a seated experience indicates that you probably haven't been keeping up with VR developments much. You feel its not the way to go........most of the VR world probably doesn't agree. Whatever. You can have your 'opinion' on that.

As for the competition thing, you're definitely overblowing it. Its not MS vs Sony. Its PC VR and console VR. They can certainly co-exist without threatening each other. You're right that competition isn't always automatically good, but its certainly a very positive thing in this case, even considering that its NOT really a competition. I seriously don't understand why you keep insisting it is or that's its such a huge deal. It seriously sounds like you're trying to turn this into some VS platform warz of some kind.

 

[kyser73]

The fact that you only learned just recently that Oculus were targeting a seated experience indicates that you probably haven't been keeping up with VR developments much. You feel its not the way to go........most of the VR world probably doesn't agree. Whatever. You can have your 'opinion' on that.

As for the competition thing, you're definitely overblowing it. Its not MS vs Sony. Its PC VR and console VR. They can certainly co-exist without threatening each other. You're right that competition isn't always automatically good, but its certainly a very positive thing in this case, even considering that its NOT really a competition. I seriously don't understand why you keep insisting it is or that's its such a huge deal. It seriously sounds like you're trying to turn this into some VS platform warz of some kind.

I think the two approaches - walled garden and free for all - complement each other well.

On a less serious note, I'd like to go surfing on Methane on Titan via VR...

 

[TheJollyCorner]

after reading impressions on The Deep I now really, really want Sony to get Artdink working on a VR Aquanaut's Holiday.

 

[Mr.Green]

The exact quote of the "design choice" to allow visibility out of the headset to accommodate those uncomfortable with being completely cut off from the real world, is in this thread. If it's true that Sony has presence as its "highest priority" for their HMD then that "desing choice" argument has to be false (and I assume just from someone that doesn't have the right answer, the same as the guy in the "tested" video claiming the HMD has "2 1080p panels", when sony explicitly stated there is only one)

It contradicts presence and the entire principle of believing you are in a different reality. If you can see outside of it, you are taken out of that reality. It's conflicting information to what your brain expects to understand the reality you are in, and it is impossible to be present in both at the same time.

All valid points, but as someone with extensive DK1 experience I can totally understand why someone would want to keep a grip on the real world. Especially when playing horror games. I'm not someone who's normally afraid of playing horror games or watching scary movies but horror games are almost too intense for me, mainly because of I'm completely shut down from the real world. It's like there's a part of you that's subconsciously afraid someone is gonna sneak up on you and tap on your shoulder, all the time. I warned my wife: If you wanna talk to me and I have these things on my head, unless it's urgent please just come back later. I might die otherwise.

I think it's a wise move by Sony but they absolutely need to give us both options though. I'm sure they will.

 

[Nightengale]

Sony said they're looking at ways to accommodate both designs needs.

Given that Oculus already has a design that completely traps you in, it makes sense that for a prototype, Sony goes with the option that doesn't, to get a 2nd opinion of that approach compared to Oculus.

And is it that hard though? Feels like as long as there's a mechanism to completely clasp the visor towards your full eye vision, that is enough to trap you in.

 

[plagiarize]

I think the two approaches - walled garden and free for all - complement each other well.

On a less serious note, I'd like to go surfing on Methane on Titan via VR...

Exactly. Sony are going to provide a good uniform experience for anyone interested in VR. Oculus are going to provide a great highly customizable experience with all of the benefits and downsides of PC gaming.

Yes, the PC you will need to run the Oculus at the 'minimum' standards Oculus have laid out is going to be super expensive *early next year*. But that's going to come down, and it's going to become a much more common render target with games on a wider range of hardware too.

People currently target 1080p and 60fps as the most common target for their PC versions, it seems to me, while allowing for higher... but that's only based on the monitors on people's desks. People developing VR games will be able to target lower powered hardware for 1440p at 90 fps should they choose.

StarCitizen level graphics are going to be mind blowing in VR, no question, but you don't need that level of fidelity for an amazing VR experience, as anyone who has tried out a VR demo will likely tell you.

So Sony (and Oculus) are fine. On PC it's going to come down to the developers deciding how many users they want to target, and the average hardware of the people that bought the Oculus, vs the graphical fidelity they want to reach.

But it all only gets easier, for everyone, as we move forwards in time.

 

[kyser73]

Anyhoo...I add this as an edit on the Eurogramer specs thread, but probably worth asking here:

Does anyone think Sony will institute some really strict publishing/development guidelines for devs writing for Morpheus? I'm thinking rules about ensuring all the basic elements required for the visuals and so on.

And is it that hard though? Feels like as long as there's a mechanism to completely clasp the visor towards your full eye vision, that is enough to trap you in.

Some kind of interchangeable add on? Maybe clip in a foam cushion for the full iso-tank experience.

 

[Sidewinder]

after reading impressions on The Deep I now really, really want Sony to get Artdink working on a VR Aquanaut's Holiday.

Yes and I wouldn't mind getting "Galapagos" for PS4 VR

Spoiler

Afrika sequel

either

 

[Violater]

Someone else should have done the tested interview.

 

[Nzyme32]

None of this fine paragraph addresses the actual point I was making, which is that Sony may well have information that informed this design that being completely cut off isn't for everyone, and that the hit to the immersive experience is worth it for a demo unit.

No-one complained of sickness from being able to see out of a gap below their main FOV. It's not like it's a massive gap all the way around the Morpheus headpiece - and TBH you're exhibiting the same lack of empathy toward other people the poster I originally replied to was.

Why is this taking a short cut? I'm fairly certain that creating a completely sealed unit would be just as easy.

I've added more to my post. I agree that some people may not be comfortable being cut off from the real world

I'm saying that presence - the belief of existing in a different reality is not possible when being able to be see out side of that virtual reality. The sensation will disappear and simply become an immersive experience wearing a HMD - the sensation is completely different.

TO CLARIFY - that is not to say presence is not possible in morpheus, but that you will lose the sensation when you see outside of that, and it will be disorienting to some degree (not necessarily sickening). You would have to experiment to determine how big of a problem it is

 

[StuBurns]

Someone else should have done the tested interview.

Norm was just as bad for letting him off the hook.

I'm saying that presence - the belief of existing in a different reality is not possible when being able to be see out side of that virtual reality. The sensation will disappear and simply become an immersive experience wearing a HMD - the sensation is completely different.

And how do you know that?

 

[Nightengale]

Does anyone think Sony will institute some really strict publishing/development guidelines for devs writing for Morpheus? I'm thinking rules about ensuring all the basic elements required for the visuals and so on.

I can imagine that anything's that the anti-thesis of their core VR experience being refused, but otherwise, anything overly strict would go against their current saying of the opportunities and the wild wild west state of looking at the VR space.

Like maybe preventing anything below a certain FPS threshold to be a released.

 

[Nzyme32]

All valid points, but as someone with extensive DK1 experience I can totally understand why someone would want to keep a grip on the real world. Especially when playing horror games. I'm not someone who's normally afraid of playing horror games or watching scary movies but horror games are almost too intense for me, mainly because of I'm completely shut down from the real world. It's like there's a part of you that's subconsciously afraid someone is gonna sneak up on you and tap on your shoulder, all the time. I warned my wife: If you wanna talk to me and I have these things on my head, unless it's urgent please just come back later. I might die otherwise.

I think it's a wise move by Sony but they absolutely need to give us both options though. I'm sure they will.

Absolutely. I'm saying that it can't have been a design decision to leave it just open because it doesn't match the high priority they have on presence. The choice would be perfect, some sort of shutter maybe.

The other option is being able to have two cameras on the headset, so you can pause or switch to an overlay to see your surroundings and then jump back into the action.

 

[kyser73]

I've added more to my post. I agree that some people may not be comfortable being cut off from the real world

I'm saying that presence - the belief of existing in a different reality is not possible when being able to be see out side of that virtual reality. The sensation will disappear and simply become an immersive experience wearing a HMD - the sensation is completely different.

TO CLARIFY - that is not to say presence is not possible in morpheus, but that you will lose the sensation when you see outside of that, and it will be disorienting to some degree (not necessarily sickening). You would have to experiment to determine how big of a problem it is

Then we've come to an agreeable meeting of thinking! Completely agree that having a gap will negate the concept of 'presence' in the strictest sense, but that might not be what every user wants in every experience.

This level of agreeableness is uncommon on messageboards IME, and I praise gaf for it!

 

[Nzyme32]

Then we've come to an agreeable meeting of thinking! Completely agree that having a gap will negate the concept of 'presence' in the strictest sense, but that might not be what every user wants in every experience.

This level of agreeableness is uncommon on messageboards IME, and I praise gaf for it!

Definitely! I think the way I'm kind of rant typing is not really helping the situation

 

[Cthulhu_Steev]

I wonder how VR could help with agoraphobics, and other phobias with conditioning therapies? It could be a 'safe' environment for people to have gentle introductions to their fear triggers.

This is probably already happening though, I've only look at VR as a videogaming medium.

 

[backbreaker65]

Seems as though the rules are still being written as Anton states in the Eurogamer interview.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-project-morpheus-spec-analysis

The Verge's eyes-on report suggests that the immersive effect of Morpheus aren't as impressive as Oculus, but as Sony's Anton Mikhailov told Eurogamer in an interview due to be published this weekend, there is no current standard on VR specifications, so perhaps the field of view comparison isn't quite as cut and dried as it seems.

"Is the difference diagonal or horizontal? That's the key there - diagonal is basically 1.4 times the horizontal. Ours is 90 degrees horizontal. If you do that calculation diagonal it's over 100, or somewhere - I think it's quite complicated doing the maths because the optics we're using are fairly non-standard, so I can't give you an exact answer. But it's certainly far above 90," Mikhailov told us.

"Because this is the wild west of VR, we don't have a standard way of measuring things. When you buy a 46-inch TV, you know they mean diagonal, not horizontal. If we'd like to compare specs, we need to get a very clear spec in line. And actually optics are even more complex than that - you know, for the head-mount displays it's a little strange because the aspect ratio might not even be 16:9. What you really want is a vertical field of view and a horizontal field of view. Diagonal can be kind of misleading. It gets complicated, and the numbers range wildly - basically we can quote numbers between 90 and 120, depending on how you want to talk about it.

 

[Mr.Green]

And how do you know that?

I'm not going to answer that one for him - I'm sure he will - but I do have VR experience and I've definitely had several "presence" moments even with the shitty DK1. It's an amazing experience but it's a very fragile thing. Not something you get with speakers, not something you get sitting on your ass if your character is standing up and definitely not if you can see the real world shine through.

That's probably gonna vary from one person to the other but seeing the real world seems like a pretty obvious universal presence breaker to me.

 

[mckmas8808]

Seems as though the rules are still being written as Anton states in the Eurogamer interview.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-project-morpheus-spec-analysis

The Verge's eyes-on report suggests that the immersive effect of Morpheus aren't as impressive as Oculus, but as Sony's Anton Mikhailov told Eurogamer in an interview due to be published this weekend, there is no current standard on VR specifications, so perhaps the field of view comparison isn't quite as cut and dried as it seems.

"Is the difference diagonal or horizontal? That's the key there - diagonal is basically 1.4 times the horizontal. Ours is 90 degrees horizontal. If you do that calculation diagonal it's over 100, or somewhere - I think it's quite complicated doing the maths because the optics we're using are fairly non-standard, so I can't give you an exact answer. But it's certainly far above 90," Mikhailov told us.

"Because this is the wild west of VR, we don't have a standard way of measuring things. When you buy a 46-inch TV, you know they mean diagonal, not horizontal. If we'd like to compare specs, we need to get a very clear spec in line. And actually optics are even more complex than that - you know, for the head-mount displays it's a little strange because the aspect ratio might not even be 16:9. What you really want is a vertical field of view and a horizontal field of view. Diagonal can be kind of misleading. It gets complicated, and the numbers range wildly - basically we can quote numbers between 90 and 120, depending on how you want to talk about it.

This is a new world people. I hope everyone handles it that way and with care.

 

[luffeN]

I'm not going to answer that one for him - I'm sure he will - but I do have VR experience and I've definitely had several "presence" moments even with the shitty DK1. It's an amazing experience but it's a very fragile thing. Not something you get with speakers, not something you get sitting on your ass if your character is standing up and definitely not if you can see the real world shine through.

That's probably gonna vary from one person to the other but seeing the real world seems like a pretty obvious universal presence breaker to me.

There were two moments with DK1 where I felt presence. The cinema app and a horror game where you sit inside a living room and play retro games on a big TV. In both instances I felt that I was there, sitting in the movies / living room. It was awesome. The funny thing about the cinema app was that my legs felt as if they were in a big, empty cinema room, can't describe it any other way sadly.

 

[Mindlog]

The Rift isn't intended to be some tiny community, they're looking to sell millions of units. A couple of hundred thousand people might be happy to spend $350 on a novelty that doesn't really get support, when you're asking for millions of sales, you're presenting a seriously accepted sub-platform, and that means serious support.

Oculus aren't treating this like some garage tinkering curiosity.

No doubt that's the goal. However, nothing about their process has been about cutting corners to get there. As in the previous thread while it might happen I is no reason to bind VR headsets to screen parity.

I wonder how VR could help with agoraphobics, and other phobias with conditioning therapies? It could be a 'safe' environment for people to have gentle introductions to their fear triggers.

This is probably already happening though, I've only look at VR as a videogaming medium.

Yes, already happening even with headsets that are absolutely awful compared to the Morpheus. Really it's more reason to create a premium line of headset similar to the medical HMZ.

 

[StuBurns]

I'm not going to answer that one for him - I'm sure he will - but I do have VR experience and I've definitely had several "presence" moments even with the shitty DK1. It's an amazing experience but it's a very fragile thing. Not something you get with speakers, not something you get sitting on your ass if your character is standing up and definitely not if you can see the real world shine through.

That's probably gonna vary from one person to the other but seeing the real world seems like a pretty obvious universal presence breaker to me.

Seeing a slit of the real world seems like it wouldn't be, because presence is about the subconscious being convinced, it doesn't seem like it would matter if you are objectively reminded of your place, because consciously you are always aware you're in a headset.

It's like the FoV debate, if you were wearing scuba gear underwater, your FoV would be notably diminished, but you would still react to a shark coming at you I would imagine.

I don't think this will be an issue, because I imagine Sony will have some sort of rubber removable thing on the bottom so people can choose, but I also don't really believe it would prevent presence if they didn't.

However, your comment about sitting is very surprising to me. I would imagine 80 to 90% of the time in VR we'll be sitting, controlling a character that isn't. If presence isn't possible under that criteria, it's going to suck ass.

 

[tusken77]

Edge article: Sony’s dazzling Project Morpheus demos show that virtual reality’s future is bigger than videogames

 

[Giant Panda]

So what's the advantages and disadvantages of using bright LEDs for tracking instead of infrared like on oculus?

 

[DBT85]

So what's the advantages and disadvantages of using bright LEDs for tracking instead of infrared like on oculus?

Using bright LEDs mean you can still play even in a dark room. Can't do with with IR.

Spoiler

 

[Man]

Edge article: Sony’s dazzling Project Morpheus demos show that virtual reality’s future is bigger than videogames

The term ‘revolutionary’ has been hijacked by public relations people and diluted with overuse, but like Oculus Rift before it, I’d happily describe Project Morpheus as such without fear of sounding disingenuous.

.

 

[Mr.Green]

Seeing a slit of the real world seems like it wouldn't be, because presence is about the subconscious being convinced, it doesn't seem like it would matter if you are objectively reminded of your place, because consciously you are always aware you're in a headset.

It's like the FoV debate, if you were wearing scuba gear underwater, your FoV would be notably diminished, but you would still react to a shark coming at you I would imagine.

I don't think this will be an issue, because I imagine Sony will have some sort of rubber removable thing on the bottom so people can choose, but I also don't really believe it would prevent presence if they didn't.

However, your comment about sitting is very surprising to me. I would imagine 80 to 90% of the time in VR we'll be sitting, controlling a character that isn't. If presence isn't possible under that criteria, it's going to suck ass.

Like I said, I'm sure it's going to vary from one person to the other but to me, simply standing up is night and day. If I start playing a game sitting down, and then stand up it's like there's a switch that flips up in my brain. I could swear the perspective changes in the game but it's clearly not as there's no translation tracking on the DK1. I've made a friend try that and asked him if he noticed how the point of view got higher. He said "yes" well I said no it didn't. I was kinda happy to confirm I wasn't crazy, too.

But don't get me wrong though. It's not a black and white situation. Even without the perfect conditions it's still a whole fucking lot more immersive than a monitor and it's far from sucking ass.

But man, when you get a taste of presence... It's something you'll remember forever. I was playing a little puzzle game called Qbeh, and long story short, at one place you get to place blocks on a wall to climb it, and of course while standing up I physically reached with my hand to hold myself against the wall like I was afraid to fall down. People around me laughed and I felt both amazed and a little dumb. I didn't know about that "presence" concept at that point but I knew I had just experienced something really weird.

Another one: Alone in the Rift. Little horror demo with amazingly good and creepy atmospheric sound. It also supports the Razer Hydra in a way that your right hand controls a flash light 1:1. You're in a forest and it's very dark which helps with the low res and screen door of the DK1. I started this one seated and I felt something was off so I decided to stand up to see if it made a difference. It was like I was freaking teleported to the damn place. So I start walking in the forest not sure what to do and at one point you cross a river and then you see a little cabin up a hill and as you approach you can see a Ringu like little girl and you know the jump scare is coming...

So predictably she kinda jumps at you and disappears but it's still pretty effective. I thought to myself, pretty cool, horror games will be a blast with this! And then I started wandering around the environment thinking that was over, and she fucking reappeared in front of me her face covered in blood and I swear to god I literally screamed like a little girl while ripping the damn thing off my head.

Since then I've been scared shitless to play anything remotely scary. I had heard CliffyB mention horror games would be too intense in VR and I thought he was full of shit but I'm now convinced it won't be for everyone. I only played a one-man-made in Unity demo. A triple-A horror VR experience could really fuck some people up.

 

[rjinaz]

Edge article: Sony’s dazzling Project Morpheus demos show that virtual reality’s future is bigger than videogames

The author seems to share my exact feelings about the future of VR as well.

It's a solid read. Gives good impressions of the Morpheus demos and also goes into how those in the gaming industry and even outside the industry are excited for VR.

So Sony developers have had access to Morpheus since November, so about 4 months? I'm excited to see what they come up with a year from now.

 

[ScepticMatt]

Surely OR will lose customers over this (they just lost me!).

OR will lose some customers, but it's not a zero sum game. Not everyone ows both a PS4 and VR-ready PC, and more VR platforms means more VR games in development.
So the size of the market will increase, potentially offsetting losses due to competition.

 

[Nightengale]

Wow, apparently even within Sony first-party, Morpheus is only selectively shown around. Josh Scherr of ND sounds like he's never actually used it, and that ND currently doesn't have it at all.

Sony London, who had to actually make a demo for the product only got to see the kit for the first time November last year.

 

[Triple U]

The fact that you only learned just recently that Oculus were targeting a seated experience indicates that you probably haven't been keeping up with VR developments much. You feel its not the way to go........most of the VR world probably doesn't agree. Whatever. You can have your 'opinion' on that.

As for the competition thing, you're definitely overblowing it. Its not MS vs Sony. Its PC VR and console VR. They can certainly co-exist without threatening each other. You're right that competition isn't always automatically good, but its certainly a very positive thing in this case, even considering that its NOT really a competition. I seriously don't understand why you keep insisting it is or that's its such a huge deal. It seriously sounds like you're trying to turn this into some VS platform warz of some kind.

I've followed VR sparingly but I never really missed a chance to see oculus impressions. I've never read anything about aiming for a seated experience. Big whoop? Especially when you can see multiple pictures of people using oculus standing up and having a blast. I would've thought that it would fall into the preference of developer. But if not it's a strike against oculus IMO, sorry. I don't have anything against seated VR, there are various types of games were that method would be superior. But you couldn't point out any sane person in the "VR world" that would prefer being limited to being seated only versus all the various alternatives being readily available.

And I'm not overblowing a thing. If anything somebody is downplaying the significance of a competitor with a better, more diverse and complete product. I never said anything about the two not coexisting, rival products coexist all the time. But cannabalization happens as well, don't see why you are trying your damnedest to hide from that. There are going to be times when customers are interested in both and will only choose one. The fact that they are PC vs Consoles doesn't change a thing because it happens there as much as anywhere. Which is why you have companies like Nvidia snipe and prod at consoles whenever they get the chance.

I'm not going to even address the bullshit "why you trying to start platform wars" conjecture. Like dude get a clue.

 

[gofreak]

Edge article: Sony’s dazzling Project Morpheus demos show that virtual reality’s future is bigger than videogames

If accurate, and not from another slightly misinformed Sony rep, this would confirm one of my questions too:

A Sony London representative explains that the studio started work on the demo in November 2013, when the team were first shown the device. A small, flat black processing unit beside each demo stand takes the signal out from the PS4 and splits it out onto TV screen and headset present, and some of the 3D audio processing happens there, he says.

So that's good.

Great impressions too, sounds like the Move tracking in the Castle demo worked perfectly for them. And when it works it seems to be quite thrilling by all accounts.

 

[Gaz_RB]

Amazing previews. Technology is amazing to me in how it overcomes obstacles and naysayers alike. We always think we hit a wall and then we as humans find a way to climb over it and carry on. Can only imagine what the future will look like years from now.

Whew. Getting a little ahead of myself lol

 

[FleetFeet]

Here's a new piece from Kotaku...

http://kotaku.com/sonys-working-hard-to-make-ps4-vr-thats-cool-and-won-1548912177

 

[fasTRapid]

So, please excuse my maybe dumb question as I don't really know how far the Augmented Reality Glasses technology has come in the last years but would it be thereotically possible to kind of outsource the HUD of a game to something like Google Glasses as you can wear glasses inside the Morpheus?

 

[Man]

Here's a new piece from Kotaku...

http://kotaku.com/sonys-working-hard-to-make-ps4-vr-thats-cool-and-won-1548912177

Nice GIF they have:

 

[FleetFeet]

Nice GIF they have:

It reminded me of the DS3 to DS4 gif...

 

[gofreak]

Here's a new piece from Kotaku...

http://kotaku.com/sonys-working-hard-to-make-ps4-vr-thats-cool-and-won-1548912177

Insight there into Sony WWS's software policy for Morpheus:

While Yoshida didn't talk about any specific games being made for Morpheus he did at least articulate Sony's Morpheus gaming philosophy. He said they're "totally anti-port." He doesn't want his teams making games that can be played with or without the headset. He doesn't want old games brought back with headset controls. He wants games built for Morpheus or for non-Morpheus games to have a Morpheus-only side mode.

I've a feeling there may be case-by-case exceptions to this...

 

[Mitark]

did they release the video for the Conference?

since i saw some clips used in the FOX10 News video, maybe they did release the video? but i couldn't find it anywhere , and i guess the project name did half the marketing for sony hehe

FOX10 News - Sony's Project Morpheus
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jtcvp-JfYY