Support NeoGAF

[IbizaPocholo]

Playstation VR: Sony researches wireless virtual reality

Playstation VR 2 goes against the trend of recent years and uses a cable. But Sony is researching wireless VR.

mixed-news.com

Playstation VR 2 goes against the trend of recent years and uses a cable. But Sony is researching wireless VR.

This is what Sony’s SVP of Platform Experience Hideaki Nishino says in an interview with the Japanese video game magazine Famitsu.

When asked why Sony is going for a cable solution, Nishino says that only a cable will be able to unlock the full potential of the PS5 and PSVR 2, but adds that the company is also considering other options.

“We also understand that going wireless will give you another experience, so we’re always looking at all possibilities and doing technical research. However, there is still the issue of how far the cable solution can be replaced with a wireless one in terms of performance,” Nishino says.

As anyone who uses standalone devices like Meta Quest 2 or Pico 4 on a PC knows, wireless PC VR streaming is getting better and better. However, this type of use is secondary and doesn’t quite come close to wired data transmission in terms of image quality, connection stability and latency.

That’s what Nishino refers to: Sony’s VR system is ultimately supposed to offer an uncompromising high-end VR experience – and wireless VR is not (yet) enough for that.

Besides these factors, the power supply probably also played a role in Sony’s decision for a wired connection. With a wireless connection, Sony would have had to place a battery and additional processors in the VR headset, which would have had a negative impact on the weight and cost of the device. Compromises that Sony did not want to make, which could be different again with Playstation VR 3 and advanced network technology.

Nishino says he can’t wait for the launch. Playstation VR 2 is excellently positioned in terms of hardware and content quality, he believes. PSVR 2 would enable a “completely different level of immersion.”

Asked about the PSVR2’s software lineup, Nishino says Sony hasn’t announced all of its VR games yet. More games could be revealed in early January at Sony’s CES press conference.

And what about the relatively high price of $550 / 600 euros? Nishino, of course, thinks it’s justified. “We believe that we are able to provide functions and experiences that are suitable for the price, so we hope you will pick it up.”

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I'm fairly confident PSVR3 will be wireless, but I was similarly confident that PS4 Pro would include a 4K Blu-ray player too...

 

[Crayon]

No shit they are.

And the trend of wireless they refer to VR basically means the quest. High end headsets are either tethered or have pricey wireless options.

 

[TGO]

And that's another reason not to buy PSVR2 "YET"

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

PSVR3

 

[Cert.in.Death]

Unplugged? Perhaps. But more captive than ever.

 

[HTK]

If its wireless and it looks like shit (graphics/performance ) it’s a hard pass. I agree with him, we got some some ways to go before we can fit higher tech to produce meaningful visuals/performance.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Obviously.

 

[XXL]

I prefer a cable as of now.

My Quest 2 has a battery life of about 2HRs.

Wireless is great for what it is, but the battery life just isn't there yet. Especially considering people's other problems with VR is a lack of AAA games, you can't make big budget games and have a 2HR battery life...

So I'd prefer AAA titles with a cable at this point.

 

[Crayon]

And that's another reason not to buy PSVR2.

"I'm going to wait till it's wireless/the size of sunglasses/$100" has been a reason for years now.

 

[TGO]

"I'm going to wait till it's wireless/the size of sunglasses/$100" has been a reason for years now.

It's never gonna be that
By all means if you must have go ahead and spend £525.
Hell spend another £525 when the wireless one comes out, that is your choice and I ain't knocking that.
But me knowing they are making a wireless one before purchasing the current one...I rather wait.

 

[Crayon]

It's never gonna be that
By all means if you must have go ahead and spend £525.
Hell spend another £525 when the wireless one comes out, that is your choice and I ain't knocking that.
But me knowing they are making a wireless one before purchasing the current one...I rather wait.

Sure I'll enjoy this one for six years and buy another one for for the tech upgrade and new games. Much like the playstation itself. I've bought all five generations of that but this PS5 is pretty nice maybe I just should have waited?

 

[TGO]

Sure I'll enjoy this one for six years and buy another one for for the tech upgrade and new games. Much like the playstation itself. I've bought all five generations of that but this PS5 is pretty nice maybe I just should have waited?

We're not talking about the same thing, I'm not saying skip the PSVR2 and wait for PSVR3.
I ain't that crazy
I know they mention the PSVR3 but you & I both know this will be in a revision of PSVR2 within a year or two.

 

[Crayon]

We're not talking about the same thing, I'm not saying skip the PSVR2 and wait for PSVR3.
I ain't that crazy
I know they mention the PSVR3 but you & I both know this will be in a revision of PSVR2 within a year or two.

Ah, actually you're right on that. It could totally be a wireless revision.

 

[aclar00]

I think psvr3 will be wireless, but still tethered to the console with not internal processors. Just wifi tech and a battery

 

[Johnny Concrete]

I think psvr3 will be wireless, but still tethered to the console with not internal processors. Just wifi tech and a battery

Yup and with all the tech in there a very rapid draining battery.

Ah well, guess 2 hours is enough for a VR session anyways

 

[Oddvintagechap]

And that's another reason not to buy PSVR2.

i have zero use for a wireless headset.

 

[Robb]

Better late than never.

 

[Raonak]

Between lag, image quality, cost and battery life, I'd rather it be wired.

 

[drezz]

Im thinking PSVR2 PRO
Or a USB-C device/hub that streams from one unit to another; which attaches too the headset and works as a powerbank, how and where to attach it?
Maybe it will be the size of a wallet? That you can clip on somewhere... like at top of the headsett, back of the adjuster... or on your shirt.. maybe even let A CABLE down your shirt and into your pocket?

 

[01011001]

I also am currently researching Wireless VR...

FOUND IT! It was sitting next to my PC... it's called the Quest 2.

 

[Three]

"However, this type of use is secondary and doesn’t quite come close to wired data transmission in terms of image quality, connection stability and latency."

Yeah, no shit. Imagine 50ms delays with foveated rendering and eye tracking. Would be total crap with current wireless.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Playstation VR: Sony researches wireless virtual reality

Playstation VR 2 goes against the trend of recent years and uses a cable. But Sony is researching wireless VR.

mixed-news.com

Playstation VR 2 goes against the trend of recent years and uses a cable. But Sony is researching wireless VR.

This is what Sony’s SVP of Platform Experience Hideaki Nishino says in an interview with the Japanese video game magazine Famitsu.

When asked why Sony is going for a cable solution, Nishino says that only a cable will be able to unlock the full potential of the PS5 and PSVR 2, but adds that the company is also considering other options.

“We also understand that going wireless will give you another experience, so we’re always looking at all possibilities and doing technical research. However, there is still the issue of how far the cable solution can be replaced with a wireless one in terms of performance,” Nishino says.

As anyone who uses standalone devices like Meta Quest 2 or Pico 4 on a PC knows, wireless PC VR streaming is getting better and better. However, this type of use is secondary and doesn’t quite come close to wired data transmission in terms of image quality, connection stability and latency.

That’s what Nishino refers to: Sony’s VR system is ultimately supposed to offer an uncompromising high-end VR experience – and wireless VR is not (yet) enough for that.

Besides these factors, the power supply probably also played a role in Sony’s decision for a wired connection. With a wireless connection, Sony would have had to place a battery and additional processors in the VR headset, which would have had a negative impact on the weight and cost of the device. Compromises that Sony did not want to make, which could be different again with Playstation VR 3 and advanced network technology.

Nishino says he can’t wait for the launch. Playstation VR 2 is excellently positioned in terms of hardware and content quality, he believes. PSVR 2 would enable a “completely different level of immersion.”

Asked about the PSVR2’s software lineup, Nishino says Sony hasn’t announced all of its VR games yet. More games could be revealed in early January at Sony’s CES press conference.

And what about the relatively high price of $550 / 600 euros? Nishino, of course, thinks it’s justified. “We believe that we are able to provide functions and experiences that are suitable for the price, so we hope you will pick it up.”

Device comfort is underrated. Having a lighter and more comfortable device (PSVR can be easily used by people with glasses, I recently tried the latest Vive and I had to take them off :/…) is important for longer gaming sessions. Having a cable is not as bad as before but sure it adds one tether to the non VR world we would like to avoid… but right now I prefer the compromises Sony made for comfort and performance / quality.

 

[CyberChulo]

You also have to look at it from your life point perspective. Some of us may end up in accidents where we will lose some appendages or eyesight in the future. Will you be lucky to live long enough and be in good health and finances to play the PSVR 3? This is what we have now. If you want to dive into the world of VR with good games and graphics, then this is the time.

 

[balls of snow]

And that's another reason not to buy PSVR2.

Its r&d. Wont make to market (if ever) for years.

 

[cyberheater]

I play Half Life Alyx on a 3060ti with my router in the same room as my Quest1/2 and the performance is amazing and improving all the time.
There is likely a drop in absolute visual fidelity and a slight increase in latency but honestly, in game, I just don't notice it at all.

I wonder if Sony will come up with a solution using an app and a modern mobile phone.
PSVR2 connected via USB C to the mobile phone for graphics and power and the PS5 transmitting to the mobile phone.

 

[01011001]

"However, this type of use is secondary and doesn’t quite come close to wired data transmission in terms of image quality, connection stability and latency."

Yeah, no shit. Imagine 50ms delays with foveated rendering and eye tracking. Would be total crap with current wireless.

HL Alyx on my setup with Oculus Airlink had a total App+Display latency of 60ms
no 60ms additional latency but 60ms total latency.

that's basically on par as Call of Duty on a decent TV.

so that's totally doable over something as simple as a wifi router in the same room.

and while I absolutely prefer using my Quest 2 with a USB cable connection, the Wifi option is absolutely useable and the latency, if your setup is decent, should not be too big of a deal.

for comparison, with USB the total latency was about 47ms I think on average

I actually haven't used Airlink in a while and I don't know if more recent updates improved latency further, which would be great.

 

[Three]

HL Alyx on my setup with Oculus Airlink had a total App+Display latency of 60ms
no 60ms additional latency but 60ms total latency.

that's basically on par as Call of Duty on a decent TV.

so that's totally doable over something as simple as a wifi router in the same room.

and while I absolutely prefer using my Quest 2 with a USB cable connection, the Wifi option is absolutely useable and the latency, if your setup is decent, should not be too big of a deal.

for comparison, with USB the total latency was about 47ms I think on average

I actually haven't used Airlink in a while and I don't know if more recent updates improved latency further, which would be great.

I'm sure the 60ms latency was playable but I'm referring to the eyetracking and foveated rendering in PSVR2. If they went wireless that would be at minimum 3 frames of blurriness (6 frames at 120hz) before the rendering/wireless roundtrip has caught up with where you are looking and that's the best case scenario even. It makes sense to choose wired for the lowest latency. It would be nice to have the option for games that don't utilise that though and accept the increased latency for increased mobility.

 

[01011001]

I'm sure the 60ms latency was playable but I'm referring to the eyetracking and foveated rendering in PSVR2. If they went wireless that would be at minimum 3 frames of blurriness (6 frames at 120hz) before the rendering/wireless roundtrip has caught up with where you are looking and that's the best case scenario even. It makes sense to choose wired for the lowest latency. It would be nice to have the option for games that don't utilise that though and accept the increased latency for increased mobility.

the thing is tho, even wired this will happen...

again, I was talking END TO END latency, not additional latency.

many games these days have beyond 60ms of latency simply due to their engine.
hell, God of War Ragnarök at 60fps has about 90ms of engine latency, TV latency not included.

so I wonder if games need to be super lightweight in the first place to not have that blurriness issue you're fearing here.
and if they are so lightweight that they have low latency, then do they need foveated rendering at all at that point?

like, is there a test somewhere that tested how much end to end latency Alyx has on a good PC running a wired PC headset like the Index or any of the Rift variants?

I'm using Alyx here as it's one of the more demanding VR titles.

 

[rofif]

4k120, 3d, hdr... We barely have a cables that do that lol.
that + cameras, eye tracking, powering screens.

nah. I take the cable instead of heavy headset with bad video quality

 

[Iced Arcade]

Probably for the better, Sony sucks with battery life.

 

[Interfectum]

We're not talking about the same thing, I'm not saying skip the PSVR2 and wait for PSVR3.
I ain't that crazy
I know they mention the PSVR3 but you & I both know this will be in a revision of PSVR2 within a year or two.

We have no idea if a wireless revision of PSVR2 is even possible, what it looks like and what compromises there would have to be to make it happen. We are talking massive reworking of the current PSVR2 and that’s not happening in two years.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Once they get the latency through eye tracking down, then it will be wireless.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I wouldn't bank on there being a wireless revision for the PSVR2, unless they came out with an add-on.

What I think is more likely is that the PSVR3 will have a wireless [option].

If I'm Sony... I eventually bring PSVR2 to PC and with a PC launcher marketed especially as a competitor to Steam VR. Pushing their VR investment in games on both PS5 and PC.

PSVR3 being a more mass-marketed device with a wireless option.

That's how you build an ecosystem.

 

[mckmas8808]

If its wireless and it looks like shit (graphics/performance ) it’s a hard pass. I agree with him, we got some some ways to go before we can fit higher tech to produce meaningful visuals/performance.

1000% agree! Some people don't understand Playstation's position in gaming. They aren't here to make some "neat" little toy. They are trying their best to deliver high quality games within a certain budget level. They are viewing VR like they view making a new Playstation console. It's not for play-play.

 

[poppabk]

1000% agree! Some people don't understand Playstation's position in gaming. They aren't here to make some "neat" little toy. They are trying their best to deliver high quality games within a certain budget level. They are viewing VR like they view making a new Playstation console. It's not for play-play.

Yeah but wireless doesn't look like shit with a decent setup, it's basically indistinguishable from a wired connection. I understand them going wired so they can guarantee performance and to keep costs down but I have the choice and I nearly always choose wireless.

 

[mckmas8808]

Yeah but wireless doesn't look like shit with a decent setup, it's basically indistinguishable from a wired connection. I understand them going wired so they can guarantee performance and to keep costs down but I have the choice and I nearly always choose wireless.

The bolded is the key like you said. Nothing stops them from making PSVR2 wireless a few years from now.

 

[splattered]

So uhhh why didn't they make it modular? Allow users to buy a more expensive wireless adapter setup for the headset if they want. Win win.

 

[01011001]

1000% agree! Some people don't understand Playstation's position in gaming. They aren't here to make some "neat" little toy. They are trying their best to deliver high quality games within a certain budget level. They are viewing VR like they view making a new Playstation console. It's not for play-play.

then how does PSVR1 exist? terrible hardware, awful setup process, buggy connection box, missing HDR support at launch, convoluted controller situation...

 

[NickFire]

The talking about research into wireless before launch leads me to believe a pro version will come out within a couple years.

 

[tommib]

then how does PSVR1 exist? terrible hardware, awful setup process, buggy connection box, missing HDR support at launch, convoluted controller situation...

Ok, I’ll take the bait. PSVR1 was launched in 2016 at 399 USD for a 2013 console with all the CPU limitations we know. The Valve Index was released in 2019 at 999 without HDR for top of the line hardware.

What was Sony supposed to launch in 2016 at 399 for the PS4 what would be high-tech and affordable?

 

[bentanchorbolt]

Right now the only game I care about for PSVR2 is GT7 and it hasn't even been announced yet. If I get even a whiff of the device going wireless then I'm waiting for it.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

1000% agree! Some people don't understand Playstation's position in gaming. They aren't here to make some "neat" little toy. They are trying their best to deliver high quality games within a certain budget level. They are viewing VR like they view making a new Playstation console. It's not for play-play.

They also want to reach the largest audience possible and obviously wireless helps significantly in that regard. The smaller the headset, the more convenient the headset, the cheaper the headset, all go towards mass market consumption.

High quality only matters to a degree compared to those other factors. It's why the Wii and the Switch have been so successful despite not having much power behind them.

PSVR's future is wireless, cheap, and multiplatform.

Makes no sense for sony to spend 100 million on a VR game with ONLY the consumer base of the PS5 to sell to, when that same game if available on PC would sell more, especially if/when they make PSVR2 compatible with PC. Assuming Sony is selling PSVR2 at a profit, it makes full sense to support PC as well. Every unit they sell, the more VR market share they are taking and creating.

 

[01011001]

Ok, I’ll take the bait. PSVR1 was launched in 2016 at 399 USD for a 2013 console with all the CPU limitations we know. The Valve Index was released in 2019 at 999 without HDR for top of the line hardware.

What was Sony supposed to launch in 2016 at 399 for the PS4 what would be high-tech and affordable?

they should have launched a vr headset that doesn't use a terrible 1080p webcam as a tracking device.

also the camera wasn't included, with camera the VR was more expensive btw., the original bundle didn't include it.

the controllers were also recycled and absolutely awful for the job at hand, both due to terrible tracking and due to the shitty layout.

the whole PSVR configuration was just the worst. and for what it was it wasn't well priced either.

the original Rift was $599 at launch, came with the tracking device and an Xbox One controller. if you bought the PSVR and the Camera at launch you'd be close to $500.

that roughly $100 difference between these 2 devices was far smaller than the quality difference between them

and I can't remember, but was the Oculus store already a thing by that time? because if not they didn't even have a revenue stream via game sales to get additional money from each sale...
while Sony had basically guaranteed additional revenue through their own games and third party sales from their store.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Ok, I’ll take the bait. PSVR1 was launched in 2016 at 399 USD for a 2013 console with all the CPU limitations we know. The Valve Index was released in 2019 at 999 without HDR for top of the line hardware.

What was Sony supposed to launch in 2016 at 399 for the PS4 what would be high-tech and affordable?

People really don't understand Sony's position in the VR landscape.

PSVR and PSVR2 are almost experimental, and yet still have a large amount of market share compared to companies who are 100% all in on VR.

Oculus is DOA long-term. They don't have the software development to keep up. Even Valve has significant hurdles.

Once Sony opens up PSVR to PC and mass market, we're going to see more games with big budgets dedicated to VR. Games that Valve and Meta will find it difficult to keep up with.

PSVR was so held back at the time by technology and the move controllers. That's why Sony had to scrap the entire concept as they moved forward with PSVR2. Takes a lot of good management decision-making to say, at a concept, PSVR did what we needed it to do, but to go forward we have to scrap it. You don't get goodwill from that, but they've learned what they need to do in engineering PSVR2. Quest 2 came out 2 years ago. They obviously looked at wireless and made the executive decision not to go that route here. Everyone wants every bit of tech in their equipment, but when the price runs high and it drastically impacts adoption rates, they're not happy either.

Sony could have made the PS5 1000 dollars and put in beefier graphics. They know who they're trying to sell to and how they make their margins.

 

[Imtjnotu]

Once they get the latency through eye tracking down, then it will be wireless.

still. quest 2 wirelessly tops out at less than a 1GB/s.

PSVR2 has the entire 10GB/s to use through the wire

 

[AndrewRyan]

Played wired VR for years and didn't mind it at all. Especially with programs like TurnSignal that track your rotations so you just 'unwind' unconsciously during loading.

However after upgrading to wireless a few years ago and making enough space it's an evolution of the experience. It frees your mind from having to think about stepping over the cord and that's huge because that little mind space prevents you from fully accepting the virtual world. It's like having one foot in reality and one in virtual. With wireless it's like taking off the chains and now you turn naturally without using the rotating controls. It changes how you play so you duck and hide behind cover and step forward and back behind walls to reload without using the joystick to move back and forth- it's a totally different experience. Boxing is transformed since now you circle and create angles.

Many games are better sitting down like racing, flight sims, etc. and you get totally used to the wire so it's not like wired sucks but if you have the choice and enough space, go wireless.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

they should have launched a vr headset that doesn't use a terrible 1080p webcam as a tracking device.

also the camera wasn't included, with camera the VR was more expensive btw., the original bundle didn't include it.

the controllers were also recycled and absolutely awful for the job at hand, both due to terrible tracking and due to the shitty layout.

the whole PSVR configuration was just the worst. and for what it was it wasn't well priced either.

the original Rift was $599 at launch, came with the tracking device and an Xbox One controller. if you bought the PSVR and the Camera at launch you'd be close to $500.

that roughly $100 difference between these 2 devices was far smaller than the quality difference between them

and I can't remember, but was the Oculus store already a thing by that time? because if not they didn't even have a revenue stream via game sales to get additional money from each sale...
while Sony had basically guaranteed additional revenue through their own games and third party sales from their store.

Rift also required a more expensive PC to go with it compared to a 300-dollar PS4 (at the time).

For a company that wasn't all in on VR, they produced a much more affordable option that delivered much of the same experience... Pound for pound the PSVR was superior to the Rift.

Meta bought Oculus for 2 billion dollars. The fact that PSVR has sold fairly evenly with the Rift says quite a bit.

 

[Hendrick's]

"I'm going to wait till it's wireless/the size of sunglasses/$100" has been a reason for years now.

Wireless has also been a thing for years. Sony dropped the ball here big time by not allowing it as an option.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Wireless has also been a thing for years. Sony dropped the ball here big time by not allowing it as an option.

Limited battery life, increased cost, and reduced performance.

They would have looked at the tradeoffs, determined that it being wireless (at a higher price) would negative the mass market adoption due to it being wireless.

Quest 2 lasts 3 hour and is inferior to the PSVR2, with the VR2 being oled hdr rather than lcd, higher resolution, larger field of view.

So for a comparable price, you get a significantly better headset AND a PS5 is cheaper than any equivalent PC especially the digital version.

I don't think they "dropped the ball"