Dream-Knife
Banned
I'm interested to see the tech used, but I won't be buying one. Buying VR on a console seems pointless to me with how limited you would be.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
[UploadVR] Next-Gen PlayStation VR Is 4K With Foveated Rendering And Vibration Feature
Tygeezy
Member
No, you’re either wired or wireless. It would be similar to how oculus quest handles pcvr. You can either use a long usb cable and play wired or you can play wireless through your 5ghz router or access point.
Tygeezy
Member
I think the real play is to make it a hybrid headset just like the quest. Devs can easily port quest games over to a ps5 headset knowing it will have a big market and of course it could play psvr2 games either wired with usb, or wireless with a dongle, or using your home router/access point.
People could buy the headset and not even own a ps5 if they don’t have one which would give it a bigger market as well.
pr0cs
Member
I just can't see it having Foveated rendering, even Tobii eye tracking adds significant cost to headsets (as evidenced by the recent Pico Neo headset announcement). Foveated rendering still hasn't been done on any headset in any form beyond prototyping. I will happily eat crow and stand in line to get one if I'm wrong but I just don't see it.
Everything else sounds good, especially the controllers.
Everything else sounds good, especially the controllers.
Bo_Hazem
Banned
Sony is leading in imaging sensors mated with AI so they're mostly using their own tech in a lot of this:
Tripolygon
Banned
You are right but VirtualLink is dead.For data transfer sure. They could be keeping some secrets tho.
It is technically only 10 Gb/s for its function as a USB-C 3.2 Gen2x1 data transfer port. But it could have a higher bandwidth just for its use as a VR out port. Some people who looked at the PS5's SoC said the USB controllers appeared modified to support video out functionality.
Sony could be using something similar to VirtualLink:
"The available bandwidth is estimated to be equivalent to DisplayPort 1.4 (32.4 Gbit/s, up to 4K @ 120 Hz with 8 bpc color) for video and 10 Gbit/s of USB 3.1 Gen 2 data."
VirtualLink - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Notice how the PS5 uses 32 Gb/s for A/V and 10 Gb/s for data? Same as VirtualLink. Maybe not a coincidence?
Its not really speculation but more like common sense at this point. Its DisplayPort Altmode which works over USB connector. One of the earliest leaks of PS5 was the PCI ID associated with Ariel which showed 1 USB C with DP Altmode support.
That number seems a little hopeful.
Foveated rendering gives Reverb Omnicept 39% performance uplift
Tobii demonstrated the benefits of its eye-tracking technology in the HP Reverb G2 Omnicept Edition with two performance videos.
www.tweaktown.com
MagnesG
Banned
Aside from the user-friendly aspects, (compact, light, no cables, instant startup), VR won't just hold its place on the mainstream ecosystem until one of the platform holders goes all-in on the software, instead of treating it like a side peripheral.
Putting only a couple of AA games for the whole device lifespan won't matter much.
Putting only a couple of AA games for the whole device lifespan won't matter much.
kyliethicc
Member
"AMD’s own versions of the Radeon RX 6000-series cards include USB-C across the board, which, for VR in particular, would allow the cards to support the VirtualLink standard—a USB-C ‘alt-mode’ which was designed to provide VR headsets with data, power, and video through a single port.
Indeed, the company’s marketing says the port can “power head-mounted displays with just one cable for a modern VR experience,” though the timing is pretty odd given that the VirtualLink standard was initially introduced in 2018 and has since been abandoned. On the flip side, Nvidia was early with support for VirtuaLink by including USB-C ports on its first wave of RTX 20-series GPUs, only to eschew the power on the latest 30-series cards.
Still, as far as we know, a USB-C port on the RX 6000-series cards should mean that VirtualLink devices could work just fine, and headset makers could always devise their own single-cable headset connection based on the card’s USB-C port."
AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT, 6800 XT, & 6800 – Price, Release Date, Specs
AMD today introduced the Radeon RX 6800, 6800 XT, and 6900 XT graphics cards based on its latest RDNA 2 architecture. With a release date in November and prices starting at $580, AMD is aiming to compete directly with NVIDIA’s latest 30-series GPUs. And—better late than never—the RX 6000-series...
www.roadtovr.com
Interesting that AMD's brand new RX 6000 series GPUs seem to have USB-C VirtualLink support tho, perhaps specifically for VR headsets?
Maybe AMD and Sony have had some chats about the future of VR?
Maybe Sony's new headset could even be used by PC users with AMD 6000 GPUs? Would help Sony sell more headsets/games.
Last edited:
Haint
Member
So it's not 4K, it's 2K x 2K per eye--only slightly higher than Quest 2. I guess the blessing of such a low resolution is that if they've actually solved eye tracking and foveated rendering, VR games can probably come reasonably close to the fidelity of traditional 60FPS PS5 games. On the other hand, by the time it launches, PC HMD's and Quest 3 will probably have significantly higher resolutions, wireless solutions, sophisticated hardware based AI upscaling, and eye tracking--once again making PSVR the worst place to play.
It'll never be Sony or MS. Nintendo's the only company crazy enough to bet a whole generation and go all in on VR. They're also the only company with the franchise strength to turn a profit on AAA VR games even if the medium is largely and ultimately rejected. Sony betting the farm AAAA sad dad VR walking sims would sink them if they bombed, hundreds of millions lost. Meanwhile there is no chance a VR mainline Mario, Zelda, Mario Kart, Pokemon, or Animal Crossing would land in the red.
It'll never be Sony or MS. Nintendo's the only company crazy enough to bet a whole generation and go all in on VR. They're also the only company with the franchise strength to turn a profit on AAA VR games even if the medium is largely and ultimately rejected. Sony betting the farm AAAA sad dad VR walking sims would sink them if they bombed, hundreds of millions lost. Meanwhile there is no chance a VR mainline Mario, Zelda, Mario Kart, Pokemon, or Animal Crossing would land in the red.
Last edited:
kyliethicc
Member
Here was the old leaked AMD testing data showing the same thing:
"Ariel" = PS5 APU (among other codenames)
"Ariel" chip has 2 USB-A 3.1 ports.. and a USB-C 3.1 port with DP Alt Mode..
Hmm.. PS5 also has 2 USB-A 3.1 ports and a USB-C 3.1 port..
Now why would the PS5 need a USB-C port with DisplayPort?
Sony have even said the front USB-A 2.0 port is for charging controllers, while the 2 USB-A ports on the back are for external storage and the new camera. But interestingly, Sony still have not said what that USB-C port on the front is for.. and none of their accessories use that port. Every PS5 accessory uses USB-A to connect to the console. I wonder why lol, its almost as if they know that port will need to be used for something else.
I'm not saying Sony will actually use the VirtualLink branding, but their own custom version. VL used 32 Gb/s for A/V and 10 Gb/s for USB, over a Type-C connection. And the PS5 SoC is capable of 32 Gb/s for A/V via its HDMI port, and 10 Gb/s for USB via its ports. So the system could simply switch on a displayport mode for its USB-C port, and send its A/V signal @32 Gb/s out to the headset via the USB-C port instead of via its HDMI port. It would allow Sony to send a 4k@120 signal and power and data along a single cable to the headset, as they have said it will be, all by using the conveniently placed port on the front of the console.
show images of the data
Here is someone disecting the PS5 SoC and saying it's DisplayPort via USB capable.
Last edited:
Men_in_Boxes
Banned
Isn't eye tracking supposed to be super expensive?
namekuseijin
Banned
eat shit, fitness minigames fan
Sony will use that wire to chokehold the Quest. To be fair, they're not competing, they're really different markets - one for fitness/social casual gamers, the other for hardcore enthusiasts who value their money and time enough not to bet on hackland pc.
once psvr2 is actually revealed along with a killer lineup, Zuck will be forever alone in Echo Arena fighting bots...
CloudNull
Banned
Here was the old leaked AMD testing data showing the same thing:
"Ariel" = PS5 APU (among other codenames)
"Ariel" chip has 2 USB-A 3.1 ports.. and a USB-C 3.1 port with DP Alt Mode..
Hmm.. PS5 also has 2 USB-A 3.1 ports and a USB-C 3.1 port..
Now why would the PS5 need a USB-C port with DisplayPort?
Sony have even said the front USB-A 2.0 port is for charging controllers, while the 2 USB-A ports on the back are for external storage and the new camera. But interestingly, Sony still have not said what that USB-C port on the front is for.. and none of their accessories use that port. Every PS5 accessory uses USB-A to connect to the console. I wonder why lol, its almost as if they know that port will need to be used for something else.
I'm not saying Sony will actually use the VirtualLink branding, but their own custom version. VL used 32 Gb/s for A/V and 10 Gb/s for USB, over a Type-C connection. And the PS5 SoC is capable of 32 Gb/s for A/V via its HDMI port, and 10 Gb/s for USB via its ports. So the system could simply switch on a displayport mode for its USB-C port, and send its A/V signal @32 Gb/s out to the headset via the USB-C port instead of via its HDMI port. It would allow Sony to send a 4k@120 signal and power and data along a single cable to the headset, as they have said it will be, all by using the conveniently placed port on the front of the console.
show images of the data
Here is someone disecting the PS5 SoC and saying it's DisplayPort via USB capable.
I love my Quest but if Sony pulls this off WITH wireless functionality I will drop it so fast. Add that with the rumors that epic offered to make a Sony exclusive launch title for PSVR2 and we might be getting more AAA vr titles. We need more games like Half Life Alyx.
SF Kosmo
Banned
That's what foveated rendering is. It allows them to adjust the resolution based on your gaze and save a lot of rendering time.
It's a big deal, it will mean VR titles will be able to get a lot closer to looking as high quality as non-VR titles and should also make it easier to make games that crossover and look good in VR or 2D.
It's a solid differentiator from the PC and standalone VR marketplace if it works well.
SF Kosmo
Banned
I would think the performance gains of foveated rendering, plus the possible design advantages of gaze tracking would make it a solid step up from Index in some important ways.
Quest 2 is getting people used to wireless, so that might be a step back though.
Last edited:
THE DUCK
voted poster of the decade by bots
Foveated rendering is cool, the adaptive triggers, etc. The vibrating headset.....not so sure about that, hard enough to keep the thing in place. Disappointed in the resolution, big step up from psvr, but no better than what's currently on the market, and it's not out for another year.......1080p overall just isn't enough to take vr to the next level.
That said, I'll probably still buy it and have fun with it.
That said, I'll probably still buy it and have fun with it.
Tygeezy
Member
What’s a game for hardcore enthusiasts anyway? A game with a high budget and hours of cut scenes if we’re lucky we can skip? Lower budget games have frankly put a lot of AAA games to shame recently.eat shit, fitness minigames fan
Sony will use that wire to chokehold the Quest. To be fair, they're not competing, they're really different markets - one for fitness/social casual gamers, the other for hardcore enthusiasts who value their money and time enough not to bet on hackland pc.
once psvr2 is actually revealed along with a killer lineup, Zuck will be forever alone in Echo Arena fighting bots...
pr0cs
Member
I love mine on the Q2, wouldn't consider going back at this point
SF Kosmo
Banned
Resolution is what it is likely because of the needs of mass producing the headset. Custom displays at some peculiar resolution are likely to limit supply and/or drive up costs.
That said, if you've actually used headsets like the Reverb G2, it actually looks damn good and if foveated rendering allows them to really take advantage of that res (and maybe even super-sample at center vision) you're not going to be thinking about resolution.
THE DUCK
voted poster of the decade by bots
It would have to be a big jump from quest 2 (my understanding is g2 is close) because I'm definately still thinking of resolution - the end product just can't look as real as it needs to to take that next step, when everything is limited by resolution - very much like 1080p vs 4k, but with a 80 or 90" screen. It makes a huge difference in larger screen sizes, which is effectively what a vr headset is doing, the equivalent of very large screen. Resolution matters. Also a 4k per eye screen would open it up to play 2d games on without sacrifice.
muteZX
Banned
If this is true and the PS VR2 will support foveated rendering, it will bring a huge advantage, as the PS5 can render a high resolution image around 4K, which would not otherwise be possible with its GPU.
It's similar to VRS. Foveal area has 1x1 or supersampled, better than 1x1 shader quality ratio /high resolution/, Blend 2x2 /mid resolution/, Peripheral 4x4 /low resolution/ ..
Last edited:
THE DUCK
voted poster of the decade by bots
If this is true and the PS VR2 will support foveated rendering, it will bring a huge advantage, as the PS5 can render a high resolution image around 4K, which would not otherwise be possible with its GPU.
It's similar to VRS. Foveal area has 1x1 or supersampled, better than 1x1 shader quality ratio /high resolution/, Blend 2x2 /mid resolution/, Peripheral 4x4 /low resolution/ ..
A smooth 90 or 120hz 4k image that it will then effectively downscale to 1080p per eye. Sucks but true.
Brigandier
Member
Day 1 for me... Hoping to see some info e3 time, fingers crossed some serious 1st party games are announced.
I'm a bit out the loop with VR, is this new headset much better than a rift? I wasn't blown away by that headset at all.
I'm a bit out the loop with VR, is this new headset much better than a rift? I wasn't blown away by that headset at all.
muteZX
Banned
We will see, paradoxically, but especially with VR, very high frames above 90hz /optimally at least 120hz/ are perceived better than the image resolution itself. It is important now to keep the VR alive and gradually get to the 8K / 240Hz display, excellent optics, great controls and wireless of course.
namekuseijin
Banned
THE DUCK
voted poster of the decade by bots
That's massively compelling but I fear riding the horse in vr would make me puke.
Tygeezy
Member
I’m getting a psvr 2 as well. I just believe the thinking that AAA games are all the matter is a false premise when lower budget titles have frankly been better lately than a lot of AAA output.
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
He means games like Asgard's Wrath and Half-Life Alyx, but made for PlayStation instead of dirty ol' PC.
VR is like Wii or 3DS. What works on systems like this isn't the same as just adding VR mode to modern flatlander games. IMO, that's the opposite of what makes VR cool. Unless we're talking racing/flying/sim games that are a natural fit.
RDR2 in VR would be janky and exhausting.
Tygeezy
Member
Yeah, I just don’t buy that oculus is nothing but mini games and fitness games for “filthy casuals.” There are AAA experiences to be had, admittedly more via link/airlink, but there are several excellent low budget titles I’m frankly having more fun with than their AAA counterparts. In death unchained, Demeo, Ancient Dungeon immediately come to mind in vr, and a game like Vailheim I’ve had more fun with than flat screen AAA titles.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
The resolution is a big jump from PSVR (and there is a nice FOV increase too), but what excites me is that looking at the target resolution 60-90 Hz targets and taking eye tracking based foveated rendering we should get visuals much much closer to how they look on PS5 on your average TV… and the controllers are so much better for VR too!
mitchman
Gold Member
The fact that Sony never offered an updated breakout box that supported HDR on the PS4 Pro, made PS VR an unused item for me pretty fast. Yeah, I know I can use a switch and all that, but I just couldn't be bothered. Oculus Rift S just works and has much better tracking of the controllers. If this is really good, I might give it a go, though.
Skifi28
Member
Most likely a cure to not having a headache.
alucard0712_rus
Banned
Only thing I'm worried is FOV. That was my biggest problem with my Quest 2. It almost destroyed my enjoyment :-(
Last edited:
Nikodemos
Member
If it reduces motion sickness (ex. syncs the sound of footsteps/image movement with actual physical input), you might not want to do that.
TonyK
Member
Do you think that's possible? I experienced VR sickness multiple times and I can't imagine how vibration could mitigate that.
I mean, I have motion sickness going in car or bus if I'm reading because vehicle movement doesn't align with my sight, focused in a book, phone, whatever. In VR, motion sickness is produced by the opposite: your eyes see movement but your body doesn't feel it. I think vibration in head can't supply real movement. I could feel vibration steps in the controller and be sick, because that's not real movement, it's more an information for the senses, more like sound than movement. I don't think putting vibration in the helmet will help to fool the body to believe there is real movement. But I would be incredible glad if I was wrong.
Rudius
Member
To be clear: PSVR has a 1080p screen divided by 2, a bit over 2 million pixels in total, 1 million per eye. PSVR2 is rumored to have 8.2 million pixels in total (about the same as a 4K screen), making it 4 million per eye. So the perceived different should be about the same as going from a 1080p TV to a 4K one, siting really close to the screen, or going from 240p (PS1/Saturn resolution) to 480p (DC/PS2 Era, although most people had 480i tvs and not all games supported progressive scanning). It's also the same jump from the 720p of PS360 to the 1440p common on PS4 Pro.
Last edited:
SF Kosmo
Banned
Quest 2 has a fairly high resolution, a little less than this, but you've probably never played anything actually running at that native res (because it requires a certain amount of overdraw to compensate for distortion), so it's not really being used to it's full advantage. Most Quest 2 apps run well below native and even on Link with PC games, you need a beast of a PC to crank those Link settings up to their max res in most titles.
So that's what I'm saying. If foveated rendering lets them really push resolution it's going to look really nice.
Last edited:
Rudius
Member
It's not all about the screen, but also the hardware powering it. The Quest 2 is still less powerful than a PS4 and a Quest 3 can't be much better running on a battery, even at 5nm. PS5 can run Resident Evil 8 at 4K60 with power to spare (ray tracing disabled); GT7 was running at 4K60. Those graphics on the equivalent of a 4K panel will be a sight to behold.
