Support NeoGAF

[keraj37]

For a few days I have been playing Skyrim VR and Fallout 4 VR using my PSVR2 hardware. Only games I was missing on PS5.
Finally, we PSVR2 owners have infinite possibilities to use our liked headset! And this is great.
However... it comes with caveat:

In my experience, the problem is all the issues you can just imagine in PC gaming: crashes; crashes of low level drivers (needs restarting system); need of updating drivers, weird cases of slideshow, which do not even allow you to close the game (needs hooking up to 2d screen and killing steam process, hence need of restarting later system... ugh....); need of buying new BT adapter, since the one which was working with everything so far, somehow doesn't like PSVR2 and will not work; and I could go one and on, but it is not the goal of this thread.

The goal of this thread is to compare it with Console/PS5 experience I had so far, which is:
I plugged the PSVR2 to PS5 and 1 minute later I was playing, and never had any issue since.

I know, PC gaming gives you this freedom and limitless possibilities, but you need to choose the mentioned (and not mentioned) problems that came in bundle with it.

It is a choice we do, and being older and older every year, I choose to my PS5+PSVR2 in most cases, except the games or 3d movies, I cannot miss out.

Open for discussion. I really thing PSVR2 PC adapter is great use-case for such thread: the everlasting PC vs Console war.

(regarding picture: somehow AI doesn't differentiate between psvr and psvr2 :/)

 

[Rudius]

For VR we really have no other option than PC. I bought the PSVR2 day one and play it frequently, but there is no denying it lacks many games it could have gotten, like all the racers on PS5. In therms of official support PCVR is not much better, but I'm glad the adapter is available so I can use it on PC for all the mods made buy passionate gamers.

 

[Pharaoh 117]

I believe a PC VR Headset would give you fewer problems. It's baffling to me how this PSVR2 adapter works on PC. Bare minimum it should make the PSVR2 as plug n' play on PC as it is on PS5 and support all of the headset and controller's features. Sony really dropped the ball.

 

[M1chl]

Its like trusting Sony, to do great work on PC side, when they have very limited incentive for it, when they didn't released VR game for it. Maybe in the future, this will improve. Headset itself is great tho. But I would rather use Quest 3 on PC

 

[keraj37]

I believe a PC VR Headset would give you fewer problems. It's baffling to me how this PSVR2 adapter works on PC. Bare minimum it should make the PSVR2 as plug n' play on PC as it is on PS5 and support all of the headset and controller's features. Sony really dropped the ball.

Yeah, the adapter itself, it has 4 cables attached, two go to PC, one to power cord and one is just the PSVR headset usb-c cable. Isn't it asking for problems?
BTW, I had to buy extra displayport cable for it, since the one I had didn't work, one more issue to add.

 

[Hudo]

No crashes ever with Meta Quest 3 or the HTC Vive. It's on Sony to provide stable drivers and a functioning adapter. If they are unable to provide that, it's not the fault of the PC.

 

[Chukhopops]

Feels a bit odd to make a « console gaming vs PC gaming » thread comparing a headset designed for a specific console and the same headset retrofitted to work on PC.

At least compare the console experience with a dedicated PC headset or a Quest 3.

 

[Rudius]

I believe a PC VR Headset would give you fewer problems. It's baffling to me how this PSVR2 adapter works on PC. Bare minimum it should make the PSVR2 as plug n' play on PC as it is on PS5 and support all of the headset and controller's features. Sony really dropped the ball.

Check the PCVR discussions for all the trouble people go through to get their devices working. From the impressions I've seen, those with many devices regard the PSVR2 on PC as one of the easiests to get going.

 

[keraj37]

Feels a bit odd to make a « console gaming vs PC gaming » thread comparing a headset designed for a specific console and the same headset retrofitted to work on PC.

At least compare the console experience with a dedicated PC headset or a Quest 3.

Hmm, you got the point here, I didn't think about this aspect, but this is why we discuss in forums to hear things like that. Thanks.
We can close now

 

[saintjules]

 

[ArtHands]

thanks. So basically Quest 3 is better than PSVR2 for PCVR

 

[Three]

thanks. So basically Quest 3 is better than PSVR2 for PCVR

I'm guessing you've never been to a Quest on PC forum.

 

[Three]

Feels a bit odd to make a « console gaming vs PC gaming » thread comparing a headset designed for a specific console and the same headset retrofitted to work on PC.

At least compare the console experience with a dedicated PC headset or a Quest 3.

It isn't retrofitted though. What the user is experiencing is the downside of PC freedom. Where hardware and software from different vendors have to offer interoperability, where you run into issues with driver versions and compatibility if different companies have not tested specific combinations of hardware/software. This isn't because something is a retrofit. If you want examples look at stuff like this for Quest too.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I believe a PC VR Headset would give you fewer problems. It's baffling to me how this PSVR2 adapter works on PC. Bare minimum it should make the PSVR2 as plug n' play on PC as it is on PS5 and support all of the headset and controller's features. Sony really dropped the ball.

These are the type of low level thinkers that hurt me so much.

It is impossible to make something as plug and play as the PS5 for PC. The PS5 is a closed system with a known set of values. The value in that is tremendous.

In IT we try to give endusers the exact same type of hardware and software because it reduces variability in outcomes and even then use and environment are massive variables.

Most PC users have Bluetooth on their computers. Sony could have included Bluetooth with the adapter, not only increasing the price of the adapter, but causing MORE issues, not only in failure rate of the adapter, but in connecting it to PCs which already have an active Bluetooth receiver. They could put in the instructions to disable the native Bluetooth adapter, but that would also require the enduser to pair every Bluetooth device they had over again...

Sony could have put the Bluetooth receiver in the headset, but again, this would have increased the failure rate of the headset and increased the price of the headset something people were already saying was too expensive.

The PS5 also has virtuallink whereas most PC do not. PCs with VirtualLink are essentially as plug and play as the PS5, with the exception again for the Bluetooth pairing process and the requirement to install software (this software again is installed by default as part of the PS5 ecosystem and its firmware).

I don't see that Sony has dropped the ball at all at least until we understand better why there are as many Bluetooth problems as there are, but I think there are people who have really shitty Bluetooth receivers and this is only highlighting that problem. So many PC gamers play with a KB/M or wired gamepad, so it's hard to tell.

You can look up any BT video game accessory and you'll find people reporting pairing or connectivity issues. It's the nature of Bluetooth. It's one of the most finicky technologies that we use.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

It isn't retrofitted though. What the user is experiencing is the downside of PC freedom. Where hardware and software from different vendors have to offer interoperability, where you run into issues with driver versions and compatibility if different companies have not tested specific combinations of hardware/software. This isn't because something is a retrofit. If you want examples look at stuff like this for Quest too.

It's crazy people are saying that it is retrofitted when people have confirmed that it works on PC without the adapter with the appropriate hardware... The only thing this adapter does it make up for people missing VirtualLink ports on their PCs.

You've even heard some people say that it should have connected via USB C on the PC end and while I normally agree with people on stuff like this, that demand in this case is ridiculous. How many people have none or only 1 USB C port on their PC. The outrage if Sony had made this USB-C would have been tremendous.

I think another person said that it should have a detachable cable and when this cable like its namesake implies, gets disconnected people would again blame Sony.

Lastly people are angry that the power isn't USB-C. Again, Sony probably made the decision not to use USB-C here because people would try to connect it with power adapters that would work and once again blame Sony...

There seems to be a pretty industry-wide attempt to shit on Sony these days, lead largely by Xbox and PC fanboys, but also including ironically some sony fanboys who are angry about Sony branching out of just the console space or just single-player games. For some things they deserve it, but most of it is beyond ridiculous.

 

[Chukhopops]

It isn't retrofitted though. What the user is experiencing is the downside of PC freedom. Where hardware and software from different vendors have to offer interoperability, where you run into issues with driver versions and compatibility if different companies have not tested specific combinations of hardware/software. This isn't because something is a retrofit. If you want examples look at stuff like this for Quest too.

How is it not retrofitted? Do you actually believe the PSVR2 was designed as a console and PC headset initially? At the very least it is obvious the PSVR2 controllers were never designed for PC usage initially.

I’m not arguing that there will be fewer compatibility issues with a single possible configuration as opposed to several thousands. But a console vs PC comparison should be between devices designed for each platform (so a Valve Index for PC) if it’s supposed to be apples to apples.

 

[Three]

How is it not retrofitted? Do you actually believe the PSVR2 was designed as a console and PC headset initially? At the very least it is obvious the PSVR2 controllers were never designed for PC usage initially.

It was designed for PC too yes. They even said so, the fact that you don't want to believe them just because is another matter. It uses standard VirtualLink. If you don't have VirtualLink the same breakout/hub setup as every other PCVR headset. The controllers are standard Bluetooth what makes them "not designed for PC use" in comparison? Especially as they offer more interoperability than say a quest controller.

I’m not arguing that there will be fewer compatibility issues with a single possible configuration as opposed to several thousands. But a console vs PC comparison should be between devices designed for each platform (so a Valve Index for PC) if it’s supposed to be apples to apples.

Fair enough but the Index uses the same (I would say even more difficult) setup and interoperability standards (the HDMI/DP issues he had would have presented themselves for example). this wasn't about pitting those products against eachother it was about the experience the user went through.

 

[ArtHands]

If this is the case I recommend getting a Quest 3 for the better PCVR experience. Wireless, pancake lens, no blur, mixed reality and more

 

[cyberheater]

How is it not retrofitted? Do you actually believe the PSVR2 was designed as a console and PC headset initially? At the very least it is obvious the PSVR2 controllers were never designed for PC usage initially.

I’m not arguing that there will be fewer compatibility issues with a single possible configuration as opposed to several thousands. But a console vs PC comparison should be between devices designed for each platform (so a Valve Index for PC) if it’s supposed to be apples to apples.

PSVR 2 Was Designed With PC Support in Mind, Says Sony - PlayStation LifeStyle

Sony has dismissed suggestions that PSVR 2 PC support was planned to prevent the VR headset's sales from dwindling further.

www.playstationlifestyle.net

PSVR 2 Was Designed With PC Support in Mind, Says Sony​

 

[Chukhopops]

It was designed for PC too yes. They even said so, the fact that you don't want to believe them just because is another matter. It uses standard VirtualLink. If you don't have VirtualLink the same breakout/hub setup as every other PCVR headset. The controllers are standard Bluetooth what makes them "not designed for PC use" in comparison? Especially as they offer more interoperability than say a quest controller.


Fair enough but the Index uses the same (I would say even more difficult) setup and interoperability standards (the HDMI/DP issues he had would have presented themselves for example). this wasn't about pitting those products against eachother it was about the experience the user went through.

PSVR 2 Was Designed With PC Support in Mind, Says Sony - PlayStation LifeStyle

Sony has dismissed suggestions that PSVR 2 PC support was planned to prevent the VR headset's sales from dwindling further.

www.playstationlifestyle.net

PSVR 2 Was Designed With PC Support in Mind, Says Sony​

I’ll explain it once and then you’ll believe what you want to believe. The big difference between e.g. the Quest controllers and the PSVR2 controllers is that the Quest controllers don’t connect directly as Bluetooth controllers on PC but connect through the headset, which is significantly better - if you read the reviews about the PSVR2 adapter half of the issues come from connecting the controllers.

Had the headset been designed from the beginning with PC usage in mind the controllers would have connected through the headset or through a base station like Index does.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I’ll explain it once and then you’ll believe what you want to believe. The big difference between e.g. the Quest controllers and the PSVR2 controllers is that the Quest controllers don’t connect directly as Bluetooth controllers on PC but connect through the headset, which is significantly better - if you read the reviews about the PSVR2 adapter half of the issues come from connecting the controllers.

Had the headset been designed from the beginning with PC usage in mind the controllers would have connected through the headset or through a base station like Index does.

I'm going to explain why you're fundamentally wrong and essentially know it already.

If the headset had been designed from the beginning with PC usage in mind controllers would have connected through the headset or a base station? Which is it?

The Quest 3 connects via the headset because it is a standalone headset. It couldn't not connect through the headset.

The Valve Index base station costs 150 dollars by itself. The Index kit costs nearly double the cost of the PSVR2 even with the PC adapter. How is its existence evidence that a more affordable option wasn't built with PC in mind? Why doesn't the Valve Index have BT in the headset like the Quest, so I don't need to buy a 150 dollar base station? And how is this an argument as a better alternative than buying a sub 10 dollar BT adapter?

 

[DenchDeckard]

Quest 3 and my previous headsets have never really been a problem for me. *shrugs*

 

[Three]

I’ll explain it once and then you’ll believe what you want to believe. The big difference between e.g. the Quest controllers and the PSVR2 controllers is that the Quest controllers don’t connect directly as Bluetooth controllers on PC but connect through the headset, which is significantly better - if you read the reviews about the PSVR2 adapter half of the issues come from connecting the controllers.
Had the headset been designed from the beginning with PC usage in mind the controllers would have connected through the headset or through a base station like Index does.

People with Quests can and have had similar issues though. Plus they don't get to use their controllers at all (as regular controllers) when not using a Quest meaning less interoperability. Unless you're trying to suggest there is something fundamentally wrong with using Bluetooth communication as a standard I don't see what your point is other than proving the point that requiring interoperability is both a blessing and a curse when you don't know the exact hardware on PC. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with using Bluetooth.

 

[Zathalus]

Can’t say I’ve had any major issue connecting my Quest to my PC. Is it as easy as PS5? No. But it is a rather simple connection to make in the end.

 

[Pegasus Actual]

Yeah? Well I tried to plug my Quest into a PS5 and the piece of shit didn't even come close to working.

 

[Three]

Can’t say I’ve had any major issue connecting my Quest to my PC. Is it as easy as PS5? No. But it is a rather simple connection to make in the end.

The PSVR2 can be just as issue free to connect to PC for most people. This boils down to the usual PC troubleshooting that pops up. some people will run into issues with their hardware/software setup.

Add to that what you get with a new hardware/software release cycle. New releases tend to have a period where users with specific setups post issues and solutions or patches get released for unforeseen configurations of hardware/software. None of this means that it wasn't designed for PC though, that bluetooth isn't suitable for controller communication, or some other nonsense people with an agenda are trying to push.

 

[Chukhopops]

People with Quests can and have had similar issues though. Plus they don't get to use their controllers at all (as regular controllers) when not using a Quest meaning less interoperability. Unless you're trying to suggest there is something fundamentally wrong with using Bluetooth communication as a standard I don't see what your point is other than proving the point that requiring interoperability is both a blessing and a curse when you don't know the exact hardware on PC. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with using Bluetooth.

There is something fundamentally wrong with using standard communication Bluetooth on PC yes. That’s why there is an adapter for the Xbox controller. That’s why there is only a tiny list of supported BT adapters in the PSVR2 official list. And that’s why other headsets use different connection methods.

 

[Fafalada]

Its like trusting Sony, to do great work on PC side

While that's fair - PC is - let's face it - a mess.
MSs first party offerings on GamePass are frequently the worst part of the service when compared to their console experience, not to even mention the launcher UX itself, and they have all the incentive to make that work better. Sure - you can point to certain teams at MS just being inept - but it's clearly more systemic than that.

The bluetooth stack compatibility issues are a classic example of this. I can't even count the number of times I've had issues with Bluetooth devices on Windows PCs - it's almost a daily thing that something goes wonky - and that's across dozens of different PC specs, adapters and more. To be clear, Bluetooth isn't exactly great/stable on Android or Mac either - BUT it's far worse on Windows as a rule. And perhaps not surprisingly - 90% of the time I get issues with it on a Mac - it's MS Teams that corrupts the audio.
Compare this to consoles - where I've never experienced a BT connectivity issue on any of them (regardless of the platform).

 

[Fafalada]

Unless you're trying to suggest there is something fundamentally wrong with using Bluetooth communication as a standard

See my post above - on Windows PCs - BT is absolutely fundamentally broken in some way.

 

[M1chl]

While that's fair - PC is - let's face it - a mess.
MSs first party offerings on GamePass are frequently the worst part of the service when compared to their console experience, not to even mention the launcher UX itself, and they have all the incentive to make that work better. Sure - you can point to certain teams at MS just being inept - but it's clearly more systemic than that.

The bluetooth stack compatibility issues are a classic example of this. I can't even count the number of times I've had issues with Bluetooth devices on Windows PCs - it's almost a daily thing that something goes wonky - and that's across dozens of different PC specs, adapters and more. To be clear, Bluetooth isn't exactly great/stable on Android or Mac either - BUT it's far worse on Windows as a rule. And perhaps not surprisingly - 90% of the time I get issues with it on a Mac - it's MS Teams that corrupts the audio.
Compare this to consoles - where I've never experienced a BT connectivity issue on any of them (regardless of the platform).

Well you could absolutely say "trusting X company" to do great job on PC, but it was related to Sony's product thread and as far as I know, their PC drivers weren't historically great. Vaios back in the day had a ton of issues on driver side and so on.

 

[Three]

There is something fundamentally wrong with using standard communication Bluetooth on PC yes. That’s why there is an adapter for the Xbox controller. That’s why there is only a tiny list of supported BT adapters in the PSVR2 official list. And that’s why other headsets use different connection methods.

The existence of adapters like the xbox wireless adaptor and PS Link adaptor doesn't mean BT is broken for controller communication on PC. It just means guaranteed compatibility. Controllers connect fine on BT though. An adaptor just means that that there is less likelihood of interoperability issues. This is the same problem with PC and not knowing the exact hardware. using a single compatibile, tested together, piece of tech where there is only one vendor making both pieces of tech is what is being discussed to begin with.

The list has 9 adaptors because that's what they've tested. 9 of the most popular BT5.0+ adaptors. They can test more, doesn't necessarily mean it would be fundamentally broken on others of similar spec. That's like looking at recommended specs and saying GPUs are fundamentally broken because they list this or that specific GPU.

See my post above - on Windows PCs - BT is absolutely fundamentally broken in some way.

Windows isn't great with some BT chips especially ones that are dual BT and Wifi but that's going a little off topic. Point is that using BT for controllers isn't an issue. It's a standard. It's the troubleshooting that's required when something isn't working correctly because on PC the exact hardware/software configuration isn't known and instead relies on those set standards. The benefit of that is freedom and interoperability, the downside is the user having to sometimes troubleshoot untested configurations in hardware or software.

 

[Pharaoh 117]

These are the type of low level thinkers that hurt me so much.

It is impossible to make something as plug and play as the PS5 for PC. The PS5 is a closed system with a known set of values. The value in that is tremendous.

In IT we try to give endusers the exact same type of hardware and software because it reduces variability in outcomes and even then use and environment are massive variables.

Most PC users have Bluetooth on their computers. Sony could have included Bluetooth with the adapter, not only increasing the price of the adapter, but causing MORE issues, not only in failure rate of the adapter, but in connecting it to PCs which already have an active Bluetooth receiver. They could put in the instructions to disable the native Bluetooth adapter, but that would also require the enduser to pair every Bluetooth device they had over again...

Sony could have put the Bluetooth receiver in the headset, but again, this would have increased the failure rate of the headset and increased the price of the headset something people were already saying was too expensive.

The PS5 also has virtuallink whereas most PC do not. PCs with VirtualLink are essentially as plug and play as the PS5, with the exception again for the Bluetooth pairing process and the requirement to install software (this software again is installed by default as part of the PS5 ecosystem and its firmware).

I don't see that Sony has dropped the ball at all at least until we understand better why there are as many Bluetooth problems as there are, but I think there are people who have really shitty Bluetooth receivers and this is only highlighting that problem. So many PC gamers play with a KB/M or wired gamepad, so it's hard to tell.

You can look up any BT video game accessory and you'll find people reporting pairing or connectivity issues. It's the nature of Bluetooth. It's one of the most finicky technologies that we use.

What I meant was at least the way the headset and controllers communicate with the adapter should be as plug and play as the PS5 and support its unique features. Of course the connection with the PC brings more variables and more problems. Also I'm coming at it as someone who was looking into buying a PSVR2 because I like its features and I would have preferred a better adapter even if it meant a higher price. For people that already own it it might be good enough.

PS: I'll ty to increase my level of thinking in the future. Can't promise anything, though.

 

[ArtHands]

PSVR 2 Was Designed With PC Support in Mind, Says Sony - PlayStation LifeStyle

Sony has dismissed suggestions that PSVR 2 PC support was planned to prevent the VR headset's sales from dwindling further.

www.playstationlifestyle.net

PSVR 2 Was Designed With PC Support in Mind, Says Sony​

Unfortunately it seems they didn't put much thought with the design considering Quest 3 is able to deliver a far more impressive experience here. OP I suggest you to sell the PSVR2 and switch your headset

 

[Gamer_By_Proxy]

I plan to get a new PC and the adapter next year. Support for windows 10 is getting cut off.

The next VR thing I plan to do is hook up my PSVR1 to my PS5 so I can finish Astro Bot VR before I play Astro Bot PS5

 

[RoboFu]

the real problem here is... no one likes VR and no one is investing in VR hardware or games.

 

[keraj37]

the real problem here is... no one likes VR and no one is investing in VR hardware or games.

Really? Speak for yourself, I love VR and many people here on Gaf aswell, thats given.

 

[RoboFu]

Really? Speak for yourself, I love VR and many people here on Gaf aswell, thats given.

i hope you are ready to buy millions of headsets and games because you are in the minority.

but seriously sony and others are going to half ass any issues because the money just isnt there.

 

[Chukhopops]

I'm going to explain why you're fundamentally wrong and essentially know it already.

If the headset had been designed from the beginning with PC usage in mind controllers would have connected through the headset or a base station? Which is it?

The Quest 3 connects via the headset because it is a standalone headset. It couldn't not connect through the headset.

The Valve Index base station costs 150 dollars by itself. The Index kit costs nearly double the cost of the PSVR2 even with the PC adapter. How is its existence evidence that a more affordable option wasn't built with PC in mind? Why doesn't the Valve Index have BT in the headset like the Quest, so I don't need to buy a 150 dollar base station? And how is this an argument as a better alternative than buying a sub 10 dollar BT adapter?

Rift S is a PC headset by Oculus and the controllers also don’t connect directly to the computer via BT, they connect through the headset. Oculus could have made their controllers use direct connection and yet they didn’t. Why is that?

What’s so difficult to understand? Having the controllers connect via the PC directly is a worse solution in every aspect, it multiplies the points of failure and increases latency. And yes BT direct connection is a mess on PC.

Edit: also I wasn’t sure so I checked but even CV1 used the controller connection via the headset. 8 freaking years ago the question had already been sorted and we have people defending direct BT today.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

What I meant was at least the way the headset and controllers communicate with the adapter should be as plug and play as the PS5 and support its unique features. Of course the connection with the PC brings more variables and more problems. Also I'm coming at it as someone who was looking into buying a PSVR2 because I like its features and I would have preferred a better adapter even if it meant a higher price. For people that already own it it might be good enough.

PS: I'll ty to increase my level of thinking in the future. Can't promise anything, though.

But that's the thing, there is no such thing as a "better adapter" here. What you're asking for is that they bundle more devices into one, which is generally not great design. There's nothing stopping you from getting the best Bluetooth adapter on the market in addition to this if money isn't an issue for you.
I just don't see what your argument is here at all. Is it too difficult for you to plug a USB Bluetooth adapter into a USB port?

Rift S is a PC headset by Oculus and the controllers also don’t connect directly to the computer via BT, they connect through the headset. Oculus could have made their controllers use direct connection and yet they didn’t. Why is that?

What’s so difficult to understand? Having the controllers connect via the PC directly is a worse solution in every aspect, it multiplies the points of failure and increases latency. And yes BT direct connection is a mess on PC.

Edit: also I wasn’t sure so I checked but even CV1 used the controller connection via the headset. 8 freaking years ago the question had already been sorted and we have people defending direct BT today.

And if you look up the Rift S, you'll see that a multitude of people complain about connectivity issues. You're trading one issue for another.

This is almost the exact same argument people had when they criticized Sony for having an internal SSD expansion vs the plug and play one that Microsoft had. Fast forward and when people could buy SSDs for PS5 for half the price, it became clear that they had made the correct decision.

That you don't agree with the decision, doesn't mean it was an after thought or a poor decision. Putting the Bluetooth in the headset would have resulted in problems of its own and they'd be more difficult to troubleshoot and it would have been more redundant given the PS5 has BT built in. Yeah, there's no evidence of increased latency, not sure how you put that together as if the processing was somehow done on the headset itself rather than the GPU.

So this idea that this has already been settled is kind of laughable. Whether Sony's method was smarter or not depends on a lot of things, but what I don't think they had anticipated 5+ years ago was probably there being a campaign against pretty much everything they did.

 

[drezz]

My PSVR2 on PC havent crashed once yet, only trouble with the BT adapter at the start/first-time.

My Quest 2 and Quest 3 - PCVR - have crashed many times over the span of YEAARS.
But not enough to make me not want to play.

Also, PSVR2 on PS5 has had the BIGGEST crash for me... in Walking dead Saint and sinners 2... It crashed so hard it corrupted the Save File, and PS+ Cloud UPDATES the corrupted Save File! So I suddenly lose 175 hours of gameplay...

 

[Pharaoh 117]

But that's the thing, there is no such thing as a "better adapter" here. What you're asking for is that they bundle more devices into one, which is generally not great design. There's nothing stopping you from getting the best Bluetooth adapter on the market in addition to this if money isn't an issue for you.
I just don't see what your argument is here at all. Is it too difficult for you to plug a USB Bluetooth adapter into a USB port?

Dude, a better BT still wouldn't support the headset and controllers haptics for example. It's not only about a better connection. There's also eye tracking and HDR. And I understand that even if these features were supported on PC it would have to exist software that took advantage of them but it was on Sony to make sure the hardware supported it. Again, to me it would make a better proposition. Maybe not so much to the majority of potential buyers.

 

[Chukhopops]

And if you look up the Rift S, you'll see that a multitude of people complain about connectivity issues. You're trading one issue for another.

Compare how many reviews of Rift S mention issues with controller synchronization, vs how many reviews of the PSVR2 adapter mention it. Then try to argue this is just trading one issue for another.

And what exactly is the benefit of having the controller detectable as a BT device? Because L and R appear as separate devices in your BT device list so good luck finding other applications that allow the use two different controllers via BT at the same time. Any use case you can think of for those detectable half-controllers?

 

[Three]

Compare how many reviews of Rift S mention issues with controller synchronization, vs how many reviews of the PSVR2 adapter mention it. Then try to argue this is just trading one issue for another.

And what exactly is the benefit of having the controller detectable as a BT device? Because L and R appear as separate devices in your BT device list so good luck finding other applications that allow the use two different controllers via BT at the same time. Any use case you can think of for those detectable half-controllers?

You clearly don't know how they work. People have wanted that use case even for Index controllers. There are sold separate dongles for Index:



Yes they're seen as 2 controllers but you can set up most input however you want on PC including as a 'single' normal nonVR controller. That way you can even use the same controllers if you want to use another headset.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Dude, a better BT still wouldn't support the headset and controllers haptics for example. It's not only about a better connection. There's also eye tracking and HDR. And I understand that even if these features were supported on PC it would have to exist software that took advantage of them but it was on Sony to make sure the hardware supported it. Again, to me it would make a better proposition. Maybe not so much to the majority of potential buyers.

You're conflating different things. Who knows if Sony will update the drivers to support these at a later date. Somehow people are out here pretending like PSVR2 has been out for 4 years. It's literally been out for a year and a half.

You have to get your argument right from the get go.

The reality is when you have short resources and short time, you prioritize. First I believe controller haptics work and its the headset haptics that don't (someone correct me if I'm wrong). Second, with so few games supporting eye tracking and HDR why would that be a priority for Sony for day 1 on PC?

I wonder what you do for work that you don't have any sense of project or product management.

Compare how many reviews of Rift S mention issues with controller synchronization, vs how many reviews of the PSVR2 adapter mention it. Then try to argue this is just trading one issue for another.

And what exactly is the benefit of having the controller detectable as a BT device? Because L and R appear as separate devices in your BT device list so good luck finding other applications that allow the use two different controllers via BT at the same time. Any use case you can think of for those detectable half-controllers?

That you even have reviews of an adapter tells you that we're in a different climate than we were in when the Rift S released.

The gaming scene has never been more negative than it is today, particularly around Sony.

How many people who actually bought this are complaining about it? Go to the PSVR2 on PC reddit thread and its overwhelming positive. The benefit of using BT is that it is wide spread, so it is cost effective.

Again, I don't think you know what you're arguing. You can disagree with whether Sony should have used BT or whether they should have put BT in the headset but what you're arguing is that it was half backed. And you certainly don't have enough data to suggest that.

 

[Pharaoh 117]

You're conflating different things. Who knows if Sony will update the drivers to support these at a later date. Somehow people are out here pretending like PSVR2 has been out for 4 years. It's literally been out for a year and a half.

You have to get your argument right from the get go.

The reality is when you have short resources and short time, you prioritize. First I believe controller haptics work and its the headset haptics that don't (someone correct me if I'm wrong). Second, with so few games supporting eye tracking and HDR why would that be a priority for Sony for day 1 on PC?

I wonder what you do for work that you don't have any sense of project or product management.

I very much doubt these things could be added via a simple driver update. Also, if Sony was planning for these features to be included in the future they would have said it was coming later, I'm sure. And I said there are no software that supports it on PC right now.

Dude, a better adapter would obviously demand more resources to develop and would have cost more. To me it would be worth it but I recognize it was probably out of the project's scope. Sony's main goal was just to give PSVR2 owners more options at the lowest price possible.

And no, controller haptics don't work. I thought you'd know since you know it all.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I very much doubt these things could be added via a simple driver update. Also, if Sony was planning for these features to be included in the future they would have said it was coming later, I'm sure. And I said there are no software that supports it on PC right now.

Would they? Did they say that PSVR2 was going to get PC support later? Did they say that they were going to release a PS5 Pro later? Did they say that their games would come to PC later? Or did these things just eventually happen?

Dude, a better adapter would obviously demand more resources to develop and would have cost more. To me it would be worth it but I recognize it was probably out of the project's scope. Sony's main goal was just to give PSVR2 owners more options at the lowest price possible.

And no, controller haptics don't work. I thought you'd know since you know it all.

I don't know it all, that's why I said someone correct me if I'm wrong. I try not to talk out of my ass like other people I know... I'm more than happy to admit when I'm wrong or could be wrong.

Why would it be worth it to you when you can just as easily buy a Bluetooth adapter? Can you explain that? In fact I'd rather buy a Bluetooth adapter that isn't dependant on this VirtualLink adapter.

 

[rodrigolfp]

In my experience, the problem is all the issues you can just imagine in PC gaming: crashes; crashes of low level drivers (needs restarting system); need of updating drivers, weird cases of slideshow, which do not even allow you to close the game (needs hooking up to 2d screen and killing steam process, hence need of restarting later system... ugh....); need of buying new BT adapter, since the one which was working with everything so far, somehow doesn't like PSVR2 and will not work; and I could go one and on, but it is not the goal of this thread.

All of that is a half assed PSVR2 compatibility issue. Not a PC gaming issue. None of that happens with my Quest 2.

Yeah? Well I tried to plug my Quest into a PS5 and the piece of shit didn't even come close to working.

Close thread.

 

[Perrott]

I believe a PC VR Headset would give you fewer problems. It's baffling to me how this PSVR2 adapter works on PC. Bare minimum it should make the PSVR2 as plug n' play on PC as it is on PS5 and support all of the headset and controller's features. Sony really dropped the ball.

How would that even work when existing PCVR games don't have HDR, haptic feedback or eyetracking support built into them?

 

[Pharaoh 117]

Would they? Did they say that PSVR2 was going to get PC support later? Did they say that they were going to release a PS5 Pro later? Did they say that their games would come to PC later? Or did these things just eventually happen?



I don't know it all, that's why I said someone correct me if I'm wrong. I try not to talk out of my ass like other people I know... I'm more than happy to admit when I'm wrong or could be wrong.

Why would it be worth it to you when you can just as easily buy a Bluetooth adapter? Can you explain that? In fact I'd rather buy a Bluetooth adapter that isn't dependant on this VirtualLink adapter.

Man, why is this so hard for you to understand? If the adapter provided the same type of connection as the PS5 it would support the PSVR2 unique features. That's it.

Sony specifically said at the announcement of the adapter that it wouldn't support those features. It would be pretty easy to add a "coming later" if that was the plan. But feel free to quote me to tell me I was wrong if Sony adds them later.

How would that even work when existing PCVR games don't have HDR, haptic feedback or eyetracking support built into them?

As I said on another post, software supports t would come later. Sony could launch GT7 for example and support it.

 

[rodrigolfp]

See my post above - on Windows PCs - BT is absolutely fundamentally broken in some way.

So this + adaptors + lack of HDR and other features proves that:

"PSVR 2 Was NOT Designed With PC Support in Mind, Says Sony."​