Crayon
Member
Did sony say 7% or was it that analyst a few months ago? Their target has been a really important variable and that is around what I was guessing.
-
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.
Did sony say 7% or was it that analyst a few months ago? Their target has been a really important variable and that is around what I was guessing.
K2D
Banned
Last edited:
ABnormal
Member
The Quest market is the VR Wii market: they are not even the same gamers. Whoever is interested in bigger games, not casual body controlled games, buy Valve, Vario, Pimax, Rift S. High end cabled VR. The only standalone (aside the new ones showed at CES) is Quest 2, but if not connected to a pc, is too weak to run anything complex.
People seem to be confused thinking that VR is equivalent to motion gaming, but motion gaming is only one of the possibilities of VR. VR itself is just immersion in virtual worlds. How you interact is just a matter of game design. And motion gaming is took as sinonimus of VR because Quest 2 is the cheapest and easiest headset to try it. Since standalone games tend to be little body controlled games, VR casual gamers, who often do not even have idea of the big games, tend to think VR IS motion controlled gaming. But it's not, it's just a trend.
To me, VR is the key to immerse in big gaming worlds like Skyrim or others, playing seated as in every other big flat game, but immersed in it, and hopefully able to manipulate the objects in the world directly with my hands. No interest in Beat Saber or similar games. And for several reasons, you can't have that kind of big games on a standalone unit at a decent quality.
That's just it. It depends by what you want to play: people interested in playing roomscale, motion controlled games, will have an unthethered, better experience on Quest 2 (and even more on Quest 3), while people interested in regular gaming but in VR with the potential interaction (like Saints and Sinners, for example), will have a far superior version on high end headsets (or a version at all).
That motion gaming market, for starters, is not what Sony is pursuing. It's a plus, a part of it, but not the focus.
ABnormal
Member
You made me have doubts about, I don't remember. All I can say is that at the time I have read the interview, I registered it as "oh, so Sony has that figure in mind...". So I think that it was some Sony person statement. But I could be wrong.
JLB
Banned
I get it, and thanks for describing it.
Having said that, wireless is just a convenient feature. Way too hard to go back to a wired option once its tasted. I dont think that PSVR2 is a device targeting the hardcore VR audiencia. That segment of the market is mostly on PC, which makes a ton of sense because PS5 is just not enough to run those high end experiences / games.
Biggest problem of PSVR2 IMO is that requires s PS5. That makes the equation way too high. Not a marketing expert, but maybe a fully wireless a-la-quest (but with a more powerful hardware than Dragonfly) would have been a better option.
ABnormal
Member
Wireless would obviously be better than wired, if not at the expense of everything else. It's hard to go back to wired only if you play games that you control with your body. Those games that I described. For example, in my case, I'm not the least interested, and I want to play as usual, but in VR. So wired or not would not make any significant difference. But it would on graphics, screen tech and usage, which would be several generations apart.
PSVR2 isn't aimed to hardcore gamers? Basically every game that Sony produced or helped to bring on it is aimed at them. How can you say something like that?
PS5 not enough to run those high end experiences? Did you even watched hands on? They all basically say the contrary. On the most demanding games, to have the same level of quality reached by PSVR 2, you have to use a very expensive PC, on a very expensive VR headset. And only few people have it, while there will be tons of gamers on PS5 who will be able to experience high end VR for a fraction of the price they would need on PC.
The fact that PSVR 2 requires PS5 is a problem? All high end VR require a pc, and a far more pricier one, to have a comparable experience. Quest 2 is basically the only standalone headset, and in fact it can't run complex games and those it can run have ps2 to ps3 level of graphics. What's the sense for Sony to produce a standalone VR set incapable to run Sony games? What absurdity is that? What games would run on it? And aimed to who?
Really Quest 2 is doing more harm than good to VR. People are literally starting to think that VR IS that kind of casual experience. Oh, well, who cares: they are not even the same gamers, like it was for Wii and the other consoles.
Last edited:
Gamerguy84
Member
IDC about a single wire after using my Quest 2. The quality and no battery are going to raise the experience.
I'm so pumped I already own 3 of the bigger games. RE Village, GT7, and No Mans Sky will last quite a while. I am buying Kayak and of course Horizon. Probably NFL Pro era later.
Hopefully Some deals come along on some of the other ones. Been reading about this for a good year and were in the stretch home.
I'm so pumped I already own 3 of the bigger games. RE Village, GT7, and No Mans Sky will last quite a while. I am buying Kayak and of course Horizon. Probably NFL Pro era later.
Hopefully Some deals come along on some of the other ones. Been reading about this for a good year and were in the stretch home.
EverydayBeast
thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
Excited for PSVR2.
Reallink
Member
Quest 3 will very likely sell OVER 10 million units its first full calendar year if they actually have exclusive software lined up (Quest 2 has already flirted with 10 million sell thru in a single calendar year). 7-10 million lifetime is a joke by comparison, and perfectly reflective of Sony's half assed support of PSVR.
Last edited:
Gameplay Gods Bless
Member
I've had VR since gen 1 with the original occulus rift but that doesn't matter. PSVR2 looks great as a piece of hardware just like the PS Vita did, but like the Vita it looks like Sony is sending it out to die and the Vita looked far better at this stage than PSVR2 and didn't cost more than a PS5.
I want PSVR2 to succeed because Facebook is a terrible company who will ruin VR if they are allowed to control it. Sony and Valve are our only hopes now that pretty much everyone has bailed on VR.
ABnormal
Member
That's just stupid. They are aimed to two different targets, and Quest 3 will never push VR beyond standalone games, which will be limited in scope and tech. Quest 3 will sell more just because its market (casual audience for the most) is the biggest (like it was for the Wii). But that tech will never satisfy the gamers who look for high end gaming.
Sony's support can't be much more than what gains allow, and it's still much, much more than Meta support, which buy some exclusive here and there, but will never prpduce big games for the platform. If that's half assed support, then every other VR producer is not doing any support at all. It's just math. Even idiots would understand it, if they just would count all the investments done on hardware and software (present and future).
What's the support on Quest? They just buy some exclusives, and not even many. Zero games produced. If that is support, then Sony is moving mountains in pretty much every area of VR.
Last edited:
ABnormal
Member
You can do only so much in such a small market. They developed an high end headset and they will sell it at half or a third of the other high end PC headsets. They are developing games that probably cost more than what they would gain from them with such a small installed base. What do you espect them to do? Creating hundred million dollars games for VR? There's something called reality, and at least they are doing as much as possible. Whare doing the other producers on that regard? Pretty much nothing. If Sony is sending PSVR 2 to die, then Valve, Vario and Pimax are doing it too, but with even less support (or none at all), relying only on the games that are produced by third parties. And you pick Sony as the company which is "sending its VR to die"? Does it makes sense to you? Why do you not say the same, or worse, for the other producers? And what would you do, to not send it to die? A couple or more games here and there would not make a significant difference. There are bigger issues to the spreading of VR, and the first one is motion sickness, which stops a big chunk of gamers to use it and stops developer from unleashing freedom of movement and gameplay in VR games. And that's an issue that is still not eliminated, only reduced. Incredible games would become possible once solved, but it's still not possible.
So what? Should they do nothing like others? No, at least they are trying to do all what is possible (both technically and economically), contrary to the other producers.
I still can't believe that people blame those who do 50%, and doesn't blame those who does 0%. There has to be some fundamental fault in humans. It's incomprehensible.
Last edited:
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
I think you are also a little confused, Quest 2 is by far the most popular headset even on steam being about 50% of the VR userbase. It's cheap (although used to be a lot cheaper) has higher pixel density than the PSVR2 and has a choice between wired and wireless. Yeah the majority of the 10 million plus Quest 2 owners are playing on the Quest 2 itself but even there the top selling games is a mix of your Beat Sabers and Job Simulator with things like Bonelab and Into the Radius.
The Quest 2 as a PC headset is pretty solid. The OLED in the PSVR2 is what sets it apart and makes me hope that it becomes PC compatible.
James Sawyer Ford
Member
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
4000/110 = 36 pixels per degree
3664/90 = 41 pixels per degree
So likely yes, depending on some caveats about how stuff is rendered.
Romulus
Member
People pretending like quest 2 is simply a standalone VR headset are really confused. It's a very competent PCVR headset, and when you get involved with PCVR there are 6 years of backward compatibility and some of the best VR mods around. Hell playing RE2 remake in full VR, RDR2, GTA4 with mods that feel like a studio implemented them is just incredible.
You could spend a month just looking at all the mods briefly and still have tons more to look at. Not to mention all the native stuff and AAA PC VR games. Or quest ports like the jedi outcast games, Quake 4, and prey 2006. It's a metric shiton of stuff you'll never see on PSVR2 and those have mods, natively, no PC required. Tons of emulators, PSP in full VR, GameCube is coming this year with full VR. You can already play Xbox game pass on Quest 2 too all without a PC.
Not discounting PSVR2 either, it'll have its exclusives etc, but people acting like Quest 2 is some google cardboard or Gear VR 2.0 are out of their minds. It's very well rounded and boxes above its weight for the price. Quest 3 is said to have over 2x the GPU power and the old Quest 2 was already running PSVR1 games at higher resolutions.
You could spend a month just looking at all the mods briefly and still have tons more to look at. Not to mention all the native stuff and AAA PC VR games. Or quest ports like the jedi outcast games, Quake 4, and prey 2006. It's a metric shiton of stuff you'll never see on PSVR2 and those have mods, natively, no PC required. Tons of emulators, PSP in full VR, GameCube is coming this year with full VR. You can already play Xbox game pass on Quest 2 too all without a PC.
Not discounting PSVR2 either, it'll have its exclusives etc, but people acting like Quest 2 is some google cardboard or Gear VR 2.0 are out of their minds. It's very well rounded and boxes above its weight for the price. Quest 3 is said to have over 2x the GPU power and the old Quest 2 was already running PSVR1 games at higher resolutions.
Last edited:
James Sawyer Ford
Member
The relevant metric for pixel density isn’t pixels per degree
A 20 degree difference in FoV is much better for PSVR2 as well
ABnormal
Member
No confusion, you just didn't read. So I will write one last time. Quest 2 is not aimed at the same target gamers of PSVR 2. It doesn't matter how many units Quest 2 will sell: it will never promote big gaming evolution. It will always push VR towards casual gaming. Reality shows that doesn't matter if you can use it with a pc: games developed with Quest 2 in mind have tu run on its weak cellphone processors, and since Quest 2 is the VR most widespread VR unit, developers continue to develop games that can run on standalone VR. That's simply a fact.
That's a cancer for those who want VR to play into big and complex game worlds, and all the other VR headsets are high end headsets which require a PC. Which would make them a good starting point for developers to create big games. But almost nobody outside Sony is trying to do that, so the only hope many have to see again VR on big games is pointed towards PSVR 2.
Who cares if Quest 2 sells 10 million units or 100 million units: the point is that, whatever number it sells, it will never push VR towards "non-Wii" games.
If you like that kind of games, good for you, as good for Wii mote users long ago. But to me and to other gamers interested on bigger projects, technically challenging, that kind of games continue to be uninteresting. It's not dificult to understand.
Wii sold tons, due to either the cheap price and the vast amount of gamers interested on motion controlled casual gaming. And Quest 2 pushed the VR market almost EXCLUSIVELY towards the development of standalone games. There's no big gaming counterpart, at the moment (like with Sony and Xbox at the time). That's really horrible, considering the potential.
The problem is that such a small number of gamers on high end VR makes impossible to invest much resources on it, so it creates a vicious circle. And yet, Sony decided to take that way, even if it will probably don't make even or even cause loss. Just to try to build a future market. And nobody else is trying. Hence the hope to see some relatively big and daring projects, that would never come to be with the rest of the producers, and surely not on a standalone VR set.
Last edited:
My vr journey started with a psvr then a rift s then when got rid of both just before moving house, now just bought a quest 2 and liking it, no wires is good, but i can connect it to my pc and ive got all rift s games playable via steam what i had , but i bought the quest 2 as ive started messing about making my own games in unity, so wanted a vr headset i could connect computer to try out my own games as well, but for psvr2 i had one on preorder then cancel two week later as i think sony didnt push the amount of games they could have on the original psvr so im happy to have a wait and see attitude with it
James Sawyer Ford
Member
Uh, no
ABnormal
Member
So if they reduce FOV further it will become even more a technical success now? That's just a limitation, and anyway FOV can be widened how much you want until you start to see the pixels. And as any hands on pointed out, there's no screen door effect on PSVR 2. Video quality is one of the things that strikes more. For the OLED, for the resolution, for HDR.
Quest 3 will be up to date, but the old non-HDR lcd of Quest 2 is below in any aspect.
Romulus
Member
Doom 3, Iron Man VR, and Walking Dead all run at higher resolutions on Quest 2.
ABnormal
Member
It could be, and it would already be two years of big first party titles, compared to zero big first party titles on the other side. And it would probably continue to have some relatively big games from third party, which again would never be produced if the target would be Quest 2.
James Sawyer Ford
Member
ABnormal
Member
Yes, Quest 2 screen resolution is significantly higher than PSVR 1. I don't know the resolution the games run, though. But it can be managed tweaking detail.
Last edited:
Romulus
Member
Are we discussing settings now or resolution? We can discuss framerate or whatever you like.
You said the Quest 2 resolution wasn't higher. That's incorrect. Even taxing games like Walking Dead had a higher resolution on Quest 2 and that's a phone processor.
Romulus
Member
I kinda of think the Quest 2 is more towards the PSVR side than Wii. There are hardcore flight sims, military shooters, and survival games like Into the Radius on native Quest 2. That's a pretty serious game, as is Lies Beneath and Bonelabs. And they also went out and spent money on an RE4 port. Not to mention Blade and Sorcery etc.
I mean this is a pretty well-rounded list of games, its not like its just a bunch of cooking games etc.
https://www.oculus.com/experiences/quest/section/258035155854818/#/?_k=xmhnil
I think some of what keeps the bigger games away from Quest 2 is power. I think the next version will make alot more possible.
James Sawyer Ford
Member
Yeah because those games look like shit on the Quest, not because the Quest is more powerful than a PS4 Pro or PS5
Your comparison is utterly ridiculous and nonsensical
ChorizoPicozo
Member
i think you should be worried. with that price tag and this economy....yep.. not an easy sell.
but the equation is easy:
how many people buy it + the attachment rate.
sony need to deliver AAA GOTY/mind blowing content tho. that is the next job for at least one year after the release date. (3-5 games of such caliber)
but the equation is easy:
how many people buy it + the attachment rate.
sony need to deliver AAA GOTY/mind blowing content tho. that is the next job for at least one year after the release date. (3-5 games of such caliber)
Romulus
Member
It's not ridiculous at all. You're the guy claiming the resolution was lower on Quest 2 and you had no idea what you were saying. Then you tried to explain why it was lower on PSVR1. You admitted it in a backhanded way. "It's because of settings." lol, that's not what you said before though.
I've played the game on PCVR with the 2070S, PS4 Pro, and Quest 2. the Quest 2 version is superior to PSVR1. PSVR1 has way too much fog to cover up pop in and it's too blurry, not to mention the tracking is far worse.
ABnormal
Member
There are, but they obviously have to be two or more generations behind in terms of specs. That's part of what I called "pushing tech forward", including also graphics. I really can't stand to see flat gaming at such graphical quality, and imagining how they would be in VR, and then finding that in VR they had to be downgraded to get the huge frame rate needed for VR games. Just look at Resident evil 4 on Quest. It's literally the gamecube one at higher screen resolution. The reamke is about to come out and maybe we will have the chance to play it in VR AT THE SAME QUALITY. Thanks to foveated rendering, Capcom already managed to make RE8 look on par, or even better, than PS5 flat screen version. That's huge, for VR.
Yes, you are right. Power doesn't allow to run complex tech on it. That was the point of the previous posts. And the market follows that. Quest 3 will be obviously significantly better (on screen quality, computational power, etc.). But to be standalone it has to mount anyway some weak processing unit, which surely will not reach even base PS4 power. And to run games in VR, it will lower detail. If it will not implement eye tracking for foveated rendering (which I don't think it will do, to keep costs low), it will still be two generations below to what we will see on PSVR 2 (where we will see some games reaching ps5 quality in VR).
James Sawyer Ford
Member
The resolution of the panel IS lower on the Quest 2
The quality of the visuals on PSVR vs standalone Quest 2 is MUCH better on the PSVR
This is indesputable really, anyone trying to spin it in any other way is just making massive leaps to make Quest 2 standalone look far better than it actually is
ABnormal
Member
That's true but they just chosen to keep resolution high for clarity, but downgraded everything else (WD:SS is really rough graphically on Quest 2). Still, I consider it a little technological miracle. With that simple processor it manages to run the game with still appreciable detail, and that's impressive. On Quest 3 it will do even better.
Romulus
Member
I mean people chose resolution over settings. That's a thing. Nothing indisputable either way. I find the fog on PSVR distracting and for that reason, it loses easily Not to mention the tracking and lack of analogs is just awful by comparison.
ABnormal
Member
That would be an investment on future generations, because there's no way that big projects on PSVR 2 can gain enough to be profitable or even to sustain themselves. Doesn't make sense. They could do it only if they decided to trow money on it for two generations in order to pave the way for some future VR iteration. Otherwise they will never do it.
Nobody is doing it, not even close. Why you espect Sony to do even more than what is economically sustainable?
kungfuian
Member
If you think of VR as your everyday go to for gaming I can see the concern but I'm imagining most treat it more like a secondary 'event system', and as a result all they need/want are a hand full of AMAZING EXPERIENCES and that will be enough.
With PSVR 1 that experience was RE7 for me. Although there were lot of other cool games to fill in the gaps (Moss, Astrobot, Wipeout, Tetris, etc), ultimately that headset was a RE7 delivery system for me, and worth every damned penny if I only played that one game!
With PCVR my experience has been similar. VR Dolphin Emulator, 3dsen, and HalfLIfe Alex have been enough to justify the money I've spent, and everything else has just been gravy on the top.
And with PSVR 2 I'm going in with the same expectations. They could probably stop at RE 8 and it would justify the purchase for me (although hoping for full RE4R compatibility). Add in Moss 2 (and Revamped Moss 1), Call of the Mountain (presuming it delivers), the inevitable Astrobot 2 and/or port of 1, a handful of PSVR 1 standouts with improvements, and honestly I'd be a happy man.
Plus that's only the launch, and I think we get at least 'more' AAA special stuff this round. Personally can't wait!
With PSVR 1 that experience was RE7 for me. Although there were lot of other cool games to fill in the gaps (Moss, Astrobot, Wipeout, Tetris, etc), ultimately that headset was a RE7 delivery system for me, and worth every damned penny if I only played that one game!
With PCVR my experience has been similar. VR Dolphin Emulator, 3dsen, and HalfLIfe Alex have been enough to justify the money I've spent, and everything else has just been gravy on the top.
And with PSVR 2 I'm going in with the same expectations. They could probably stop at RE 8 and it would justify the purchase for me (although hoping for full RE4R compatibility). Add in Moss 2 (and Revamped Moss 1), Call of the Mountain (presuming it delivers), the inevitable Astrobot 2 and/or port of 1, a handful of PSVR 1 standouts with improvements, and honestly I'd be a happy man.
Plus that's only the launch, and I think we get at least 'more' AAA special stuff this round. Personally can't wait!
Last edited:
Romulus
Member
I think we can have a market where Quest 3 rides the middle of the fence and PSVR 2 pushes forward. I do like the PCVR option on Quest though.
hououinkyouma00
Member
I'm interested in PSVR2 for sure, but it's too pricey for me at the moment.
My problem with VR so far is I want "full games", and by that I mean stuff like Half Life Alyx (and maybe Horizon?). Stuff like Job Simulator is cool but it doesn't hold my attention and it doesn't warrant a price tag higher than the PS5. More stuff like RE and GT are what I want, but I would need them from the start. That and as somebody that is prone to headaches and migraines VR is hit or miss from a "I want to die" standpoint.
Everything else about the system sounds bloody amazing. The haptics, controls, and display all sound wonderful. Horizon and Gran Turismo are the games I'm looking at most and will be closely watching reviews and stuff.
My problem with VR so far is I want "full games", and by that I mean stuff like Half Life Alyx (and maybe Horizon?). Stuff like Job Simulator is cool but it doesn't hold my attention and it doesn't warrant a price tag higher than the PS5. More stuff like RE and GT are what I want, but I would need them from the start. That and as somebody that is prone to headaches and migraines VR is hit or miss from a "I want to die" standpoint.
Everything else about the system sounds bloody amazing. The haptics, controls, and display all sound wonderful. Horizon and Gran Turismo are the games I'm looking at most and will be closely watching reviews and stuff.
Last edited:
James Sawyer Ford
Member
Last edited:
ChorizoPicozo
Member
Call of the mountain is the first one. I am sure they will have at least 3 games of that caliber. just like they did with the firsr PSVR.
Romulus
Member
That's not even the same game. Part 2 on Quest 2 is far worse in terms of polish compared to the first game. Nice try.
Last edited:
James Sawyer Ford
Member
That's just the first vid I searched for
Go find any standalone quest 2 comparison and it's the same thing
The difference in visual quality is night and day despite Quest 2 having the better resolution.
ABnormal
Member
It will be probably like that.
Having played quest 2 by itself and also linked to my pc, the quest 2 blows the origional psvr out the water for overall experience , ill happily buy a psvr 2 if sony continues to support it well and gets it first party studios behind it , but if it like the psvr i bought a load of games when it came out and after a few months it ended in corner of room for a yr, at the price psvr2 is not dropping that kind of money for it to end up like the first one
ABnormal
Member
Yes, I'm pretty sure there will be at least an handful of relatively big games with high quality tech. And I still hope they will try to make as many flat games possible into VR versions, like RE8. Having the real quality of AAA flat games in VR would be wonderful, and would pave the way to big native projects.
Romulus
Member
Any comparison is night and day right difference compared to standalone.
Btw the PSVR version is a full studio port and the Quest 2 standalone version is a few guys working in their spare time. It's not even official.
Crayon
Member
Damn I wish sony would say. I figure 10 million would be considered a big success. They 7% sounds like a realistic goal though.
I've only got to say pretty much what ABnormal replied with. The idea that the hardware and the launch isn't strong if crazy. It's vr. It's a small market. Context. If this is bad then any other headset must be a total wasteland.
Similar threads
- Poll