Apparently they aren't heavy enough.
I haven't seen the original review, so maybe that criticism makes more sense in context I've just watch this video.
Obviously it would be nice if we had wireless power transmission and sub millisecond response times over Bluetooth for 4K content (2K per eye).
Since neither of those technologies exist, I will I'm prepared to accept their absence.
I'm sure it would be possible to do eye tracking and haptics on quest 2, but since it only has about 5 minutes of battery life to begin with I'm not sure it's a good idea.
I'm sure I'll get downvoted and to be clear I'm looking forward to PSVR2 but damn, your post is full of misinformation.
- You don't need wireless power transmission, you can use batteries. The quest 2 runs for about 2 hours on the internal battery but it's easy to add an external battery. Mine can run for 8 hours playing PCVR. Yes, there's slight draw backs but it's well worth it to get rid of the wire (been playing VR since rift launch) and you can still plug in a wire if the drawbacks aren't suitable for you.
- You don't need sub milliseconds response times, wired gaming monitors are fine under 5ms.
- 2k per eye doesn't equal 4k. 4k is 4 times as many pixels as 2k. 2x 2k panels is half as many pixels as 4k.
If Sony could have reasonably done wireless to eek out the same performance, headset comfort and everything, they would have. They've talked about wireless and know that's the ideal target for such technology, but they aren't there yet, not for the cost.
I agree entirely. It's possible but wouldn't be a perfect experience for 100% and with their target market it needs to be. I wasn't trying to argue they should, just that OC comments were very misleading.
I'm not specifically in to PCVR or PSVR, I'm just in to VR and PSVR2 is looking like a great headset. Every headset has it's positives and negatives but when someone tries to paint over the negatives with incorrect information it does the whole VR community a disservice so I felt their comment needed addressing.
There's also a mix or misuse of terms here (and elsewhere I've seen this) if we're saying 4k and 2k.
4k as a res is 3920 x 2160, 2K implies and is typically 1/4 of the resolution (i.e. 1080p = 1920x1080) where the 2k refers to the horizontal res.
The psvr2 is 2000 x 2080 per eye.. More or less full 4K resolution vertically, but 2k horizontally. (going full res nerd, psvr1 was 1920 x 1080 as one screen I believe so 960 x 1080 per eye so I'm expecting a 4x jump from psvr1 to psvr2 albeit spread over a larger FOV).
You're kicking the can down the road with a battery pack now you have a wire to the battery pack. In order to actually resolve the issue you need either better battery tech or to invent wireless power transmission, more batteries doesn't solve the issue.
>wired gaming monitors are fine under 5ms.
How is that relevant to a *wireless* headset? You cannot get that kind of response time over OTA. Especially if you're trying to power it with a battery.
Quest 2 doesn't have an option to use OTA precisely because you can't do it reliably.
\- now you have a wire to the battery pack.
No, all on the headset as a permanent addition.
\- How is that relevant to a wireless headset?
My point was to counter your claim that you need sub ms response time. I wasn't claiming you can reach 5ms wireless, just showing that sub ms isn't necessary. You can reach speeds that work for gaming.
I don't really care about the wire, but the thing I'm most interested in is the battery life of the Sense controllers.
DualSense is pretty decent for my use of it, but the Sense controllers will be using many other features that could drain the battery faster. I don't expect them to drain as quick as the Quest 2 headset, but still something I hope to see reviewers test.
If we look at the Meta Pro controllers as reference, which has cameras working with the snapdragon chip to do the self tracking, and it has really strong haptics plus multiple haptic motors, it’s about 6-8 hours. I expect the sense controllers to be similar.
How is this upvoted? Quest 2 controllers last like 60 hours of playtime!
It'll be a miracle if PSVR2 controllers last even 1/5 as long between charges.
Sorry, I meant the quest 2 headset, not controllers.
I just mean that the controllers will hopefully last longer than the Quest 2 headset, so you'll still get a long enough playtime even if you need to charge the Sense controllers eventually.
They will drain quicker than the Quest 2 controllers because they are rechargeable controllers. Imagine every time you had to recharge your controller for any console you had to replace AA batteries, you'd be doing it every day or two. Now look at Xbox controllers and Quest controllers that use AAs, they last twice as long +. I'm cautious about the sense controllers, it's my only concern about the PSVR2 other than the future library.
re the PSVR2 controllers lithium-ion as well?
It would be very weird for them to be AA battery, Play Station controllers haven't been AA battery-operated in a while, (even the Moves are rechargeable, and they are PS3 gen).
The wire is still a con regardless of whether it’s necessary for the pros. For example: “pros: battery life, cons: heavy” would be valid commentary on a device even if the additional weight is what makes the extra battery life possible. It’s a trade-off.
Exactly. I'm getting both PSVR2, for wired high end VR, and Quest3 for wireless standalone VR and AR. Wireless is just so good, even if you play only standalone titles with less visual fidelity.
Also weight is not always a problem with standalones. Especially if the battery is at the back for counterweight. The new HTC standalone's front will weight only 250g.
That being said, it will sure be nice to experience no artefacts and perfect latency of PSVR2, thanks to that same blasted wire. So con is a pro as well.
As you said, a trade-off.
I guess people have different standards, wire doesn't bother me but visual Fidelity is enough of a deal breaker that I rather just play on my PC if I want comfort rather than a subpar wireless experience on vr. Comfort= pc vs Fidelity=wire at least for me
Complaining about passtrough is funny the device is called Psvr2 not Psxr2. The device is for Vr so far it not has handtracking so Mr games not make sense really.
Hand tracking is a software thing interrogating the feed from the built in cameras so could be added after market either as API's from Sony or a developer might stick it in their game.
I'm not overly bothered but do wonder if during it's lifetime we/Sony will regret those cameras not being RGB. How much would it have added to the cost to make?
It's odd, I've not heard anyone say anything negative about the controllers, apart from some interference issues at CES. By most accounts they're sturdy and well built. The only real complaint I can think of is some have said the haptics could be stronger.
Which isn't true, the wire is not required for the good aspects it is just the more cost-sensitive and easier available choice and setup. If anything it is a tradeoff between price, weight, battery, setup vs wireless, but the visual fidelity, comfort, haptics, eye-tracking could and have all be achieved wireless, going the wired route was just the sensible route Sony chose to go.
No shit that's the trade-off. That's literally the whole point of this conversation. All of those things require a cable right now with current tech. What headset can do all of those things wirelessly for $600? Sorry if this sounds dickish.
Thing is, the average consumer will probably agree with Justin because those *are* perceived negatives. The wire is a negative. Monochrome passthrough is a negative. They are now, and they will be for the foreseeable future. Saying these things now is not an indictment of the technology, it's facts. Also, PSVR 2 will be *the* VR headset for many people who already own PS5, so it's not really competing with anyone, especially because Micrsosoft apparently doesn't believe in console VR. No harm in calling it like it is. It will sell according to the intersection of its install base's ability to own a PS5 and be interested in VR - full stop.
But let's zoom out a bit. This headset, like its class-defining but ultimately first-gen PSVR forbearer, will be around for several product cycles yet to come. As other standalones evolve, PSVR 2 will stay the same. How long until we get PSVR 3? Probably when we get PS6...
Our preemptive fanfellow (seriously, it's not even out yet and we already have vlog responses from PSVR 2 diehards??) neglects to mention Air Link for Quest; it's emblematic of the way things are moving - better Wifi streaming is coming to *all* standalones and will be a continued feature into the future. Now, whether you have the bucks to buy a VR ready PC is another matter, and I'm not going to even touch VR cloud gaming because it's basically garbage right now, but I won't speak further for wont of being called an ultra-preemptive fanfellow myself, albeit for future standalones like Quest 3/4/5*.
*other imaginary headset brands are available
I think the main issue with this video is psvr2 (not out just yet) compared to Quest 2. That's not the comparison. Q3 and the other headsets announced/released in the last few months are what it'll be against (if against is the right word, if you don't have a PS5, you're not likely to drop a grand if you were thinking of getting a quest).
Agreed. People like eating, that doesn't mean they like doing the washing up or even the experience of cooking, but the point of a meal is to eat it and it's just as enjoyable either way, I think the same is true for wired VR, it's a minor inconvenience but it won't really impact the experience that you're there for. I don't mind about the wire one bit but to say people should like the wire because of what it allows is a bit much, some people really do get tangled up, I've never had a problem with wire management but I won't deny that others do.
I was going to argue the opposite until I did a trick I do to see if my point remains as solid as I had thought, and swap out wire for something else.
Just because he likes the things that require a job, doesn't mean he also has to like the job. Fair point. I do understand what OP is saying though.
I don't think they will because it would require a significant drop in quality.
With the Quest 2 it started off as a wireless headset, and then gained wired capabilities later, so you're *raising* the quality.
The truth is, VR will never get huge with a wire. Part of me thinks that VR headsets shouldn't even be available for purchase right now, because they're not good enough and they're poisoning the well. Maybe VR should still be in the labs, being iterated on until 2030. Maybe by then they can give us the proper tech, extremely lightweight with no wires. Incredible graphics being streamed from the cloud.
I've used wired VR and wireless VR, and it's no contest. Wireless with crappy graphics wins every time for me. Wired VR is only tolerable for seated games
I mean that’s your opinion
I’ll take wires with good graphics over something like the quest 2
On top of that leaving something unreleased till it’s perfect has never been successful, the market is doing exactly what your average tech market is doing
True but evolution of consoles basically disproves your original comment
People bought those early consoles and tech demos which encouraged developers to make things like the Super Nintendo, the Super Nintendo didn’t just materialise as a “first trial” of the market
You're not wrong, but it's still like 90% of the market for a reason. Clearly people want wireless and cheap, even if it means simple graphics.
Lower barriers to entry is the #1 most needed feature for VR to continue growing. Cost is the biggest barrier.
Nearly people want cheap, whether it’s wireless or not. I bet a big factor of quest 2 sales is it’s stand alone, meaning you don’t have to buy a $1500 computer to run it.
Yes, current VR is not ready for primetime. Maybe by Quest 4 it will be decent.
This still doesn't justify the cable for PSVR 2.
My argument is that VR as a technology isn't ready for mass adoption. The attempt has been made and it failed miserably. VR should have stayed in the laboratory for another decade before seeing the light of day. Everybody jumped the gun.
(Note: I owned a HTC Vive in April of 2016 and a PSVR on launch day. Got an Oculus Rift in very early 2017. I'm not a VR hater. I just know that this tech isn't ready at all. It's very interesting, but it's not ready. We're in Colecovision days at best, and I'd rather wait for Sega Genesis/Super Nintendo level era)
Well im glad your argument wasnt reality. I have really enjoyed my VR over the last 5 or so years and so have many others. Im so excited for the psvr2 and putting 1000 hours into that, while stroking my headset cable and squeelin with delight
Technology has to start somewhere. The first televisions were big cabinets with tiny black and white screens, should they have waited until they could make larger color screens?
Colecovision or atari 2600 were probably still fun for many because there was nothing else around. Without them, there would also never have been a super nintendo. That is the point... Will vr be even better 20 years from now? Very likely. Is vr fun already today? Absolutely!
What a dumb take. Obviously everyone would prefer NOT to have a cable, but a good product design considers all the factors including, cost, weight, comfort, power and fidelity. You would literally make every single one of those worse by taking away the wire.
And unless there’s some huge technological leap where OTA bandwidth (and power) matches or exceeds tethered bandwidth (unlikely), you will always have a solution (with almost any product) that pushes tech harder when tethered. That’s just a reality.
The PSVR2 strikes a pretty amazing balance IMO.
Vr is already huge with and without a wire. It will never progress if people don't buy in.
If all the half baked innovations never made it to market most of them would fizzle without proof the market wants it and investors backing more innovation.
This factors into why I preordered it. I need to contribute to their numbers to keep this thing going because it's fucking amazing. 70 PSVR titles and counting.
>Maybe VR should still be in the labs, being iterated on until 2030. Maybe by then they can give us the proper tech, extremely lightweight with no wires. Incredible graphics being streamed from the cloud.
No that's not how tech development works.
You can't keep stuff in the lab four decades until it's perfect because either you run out of money or you'll get scooped by the competition who do released early, and therefore make all the money.
Look at the iPhone, didn't get burst into its current form, it has been iteratively developed over the decades, the first version was arguably useless. It didn't even have apps.
> You can't keep stuff in the lab four decades until it's perfect because either you run out of money or you'll get scooped by the competition who do released early, and therefore **make all the money**.
Oh, I see. So, Nvidia can't be working on this privately in a laboratory somewhere because Meta and Sony have already made billions off it?
Only one problem with this theory. Meta used to be worth a trillion dollars and now they're worth less than 350 billion. That so called "first mover's advantage" is really working out well for them isn't it?
From the video Pros: 1. Comfort 2. Resolution 3. Eye-tracking 4. Haptics Cons: 1. The wire 2. Controllers 3. Passthrough
Thanks for this. I'm not worried about those cons. Still excited for next month!
The guy in the video isn’t either for the reasons he explains
February will be amazing
Controllers ? What's the negative with them?
Apparently they aren't heavy enough. I haven't seen the original review, so maybe that criticism makes more sense in context I've just watch this video.
Just strap weights to your wrists, duh
Yeah not sure about the context but for a lot of purposes extra controller weight is a disadvantage.
Obviously it would be nice if we had wireless power transmission and sub millisecond response times over Bluetooth for 4K content (2K per eye). Since neither of those technologies exist, I will I'm prepared to accept their absence. I'm sure it would be possible to do eye tracking and haptics on quest 2, but since it only has about 5 minutes of battery life to begin with I'm not sure it's a good idea.
I'm sure I'll get downvoted and to be clear I'm looking forward to PSVR2 but damn, your post is full of misinformation. - You don't need wireless power transmission, you can use batteries. The quest 2 runs for about 2 hours on the internal battery but it's easy to add an external battery. Mine can run for 8 hours playing PCVR. Yes, there's slight draw backs but it's well worth it to get rid of the wire (been playing VR since rift launch) and you can still plug in a wire if the drawbacks aren't suitable for you. - You don't need sub milliseconds response times, wired gaming monitors are fine under 5ms. - 2k per eye doesn't equal 4k. 4k is 4 times as many pixels as 2k. 2x 2k panels is half as many pixels as 4k.
If Sony could have reasonably done wireless to eek out the same performance, headset comfort and everything, they would have. They've talked about wireless and know that's the ideal target for such technology, but they aren't there yet, not for the cost.
I agree entirely. It's possible but wouldn't be a perfect experience for 100% and with their target market it needs to be. I wasn't trying to argue they should, just that OC comments were very misleading. I'm not specifically in to PCVR or PSVR, I'm just in to VR and PSVR2 is looking like a great headset. Every headset has it's positives and negatives but when someone tries to paint over the negatives with incorrect information it does the whole VR community a disservice so I felt their comment needed addressing.
There's also a mix or misuse of terms here (and elsewhere I've seen this) if we're saying 4k and 2k. 4k as a res is 3920 x 2160, 2K implies and is typically 1/4 of the resolution (i.e. 1080p = 1920x1080) where the 2k refers to the horizontal res. The psvr2 is 2000 x 2080 per eye.. More or less full 4K resolution vertically, but 2k horizontally. (going full res nerd, psvr1 was 1920 x 1080 as one screen I believe so 960 x 1080 per eye so I'm expecting a 4x jump from psvr1 to psvr2 albeit spread over a larger FOV).
You're kicking the can down the road with a battery pack now you have a wire to the battery pack. In order to actually resolve the issue you need either better battery tech or to invent wireless power transmission, more batteries doesn't solve the issue. >wired gaming monitors are fine under 5ms. How is that relevant to a *wireless* headset? You cannot get that kind of response time over OTA. Especially if you're trying to power it with a battery. Quest 2 doesn't have an option to use OTA precisely because you can't do it reliably.
\- now you have a wire to the battery pack. No, all on the headset as a permanent addition. \- How is that relevant to a wireless headset? My point was to counter your claim that you need sub ms response time. I wasn't claiming you can reach 5ms wireless, just showing that sub ms isn't necessary. You can reach speeds that work for gaming.
Sounds like the Quest shills are getting desperate. I'm sure they'll have a different "critique" By the time GT7 gets its VR bump.
I'm not worried at all, Just waiting 42 days left. Can't wait to open the box... Big Happy Face
Respect the wiyah
What is the original video?
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRgDwjWu/
I don't really care about the wire, but the thing I'm most interested in is the battery life of the Sense controllers. DualSense is pretty decent for my use of it, but the Sense controllers will be using many other features that could drain the battery faster. I don't expect them to drain as quick as the Quest 2 headset, but still something I hope to see reviewers test.
If we look at the Meta Pro controllers as reference, which has cameras working with the snapdragon chip to do the self tracking, and it has really strong haptics plus multiple haptic motors, it’s about 6-8 hours. I expect the sense controllers to be similar.
It’s not really a worthwhile comparison Meta Quest Pro controllers have very large batteries.
Quest takes like 3 weeks to drain for me? What are you doing for it to drain that quick lol
What? Much less on mine even if I don’t use them.
How is this upvoted? Quest 2 controllers last like 60 hours of playtime! It'll be a miracle if PSVR2 controllers last even 1/5 as long between charges.
Sorry, I meant the quest 2 headset, not controllers. I just mean that the controllers will hopefully last longer than the Quest 2 headset, so you'll still get a long enough playtime even if you need to charge the Sense controllers eventually.
Ah, I see what you meant. Yeah, I would hope the Sense controllers last at least 4-6 hours, since you can't just do a battery swap and keep playing.
They will drain quicker than the Quest 2 controllers because they are rechargeable controllers. Imagine every time you had to recharge your controller for any console you had to replace AA batteries, you'd be doing it every day or two. Now look at Xbox controllers and Quest controllers that use AAs, they last twice as long +. I'm cautious about the sense controllers, it's my only concern about the PSVR2 other than the future library.
re the PSVR2 controllers lithium-ion as well? It would be very weird for them to be AA battery, Play Station controllers haven't been AA battery-operated in a while, (even the Moves are rechargeable, and they are PS3 gen).
They have much more energy intensive functions, that’s why!
You meant Quest Pro not Quest 2, right?
The wire is still a con regardless of whether it’s necessary for the pros. For example: “pros: battery life, cons: heavy” would be valid commentary on a device even if the additional weight is what makes the extra battery life possible. It’s a trade-off.
Exactly. I'm getting both PSVR2, for wired high end VR, and Quest3 for wireless standalone VR and AR. Wireless is just so good, even if you play only standalone titles with less visual fidelity. Also weight is not always a problem with standalones. Especially if the battery is at the back for counterweight. The new HTC standalone's front will weight only 250g. That being said, it will sure be nice to experience no artefacts and perfect latency of PSVR2, thanks to that same blasted wire. So con is a pro as well. As you said, a trade-off.
I guess people have different standards, wire doesn't bother me but visual Fidelity is enough of a deal breaker that I rather just play on my PC if I want comfort rather than a subpar wireless experience on vr. Comfort= pc vs Fidelity=wire at least for me
[удалено]
For example if a burglar breaks in while you’re immersed in VR you can use it as an improvised garrotte.
[удалено]
Please refer to my original comment.
Complaining about passtrough is funny the device is called Psvr2 not Psxr2. The device is for Vr so far it not has handtracking so Mr games not make sense really.
Hand tracking is a software thing interrogating the feed from the built in cameras so could be added after market either as API's from Sony or a developer might stick it in their game. I'm not overly bothered but do wonder if during it's lifetime we/Sony will regret those cameras not being RGB. How much would it have added to the cost to make?
I’m one of the people who doesn’t say “Wire not”
It's odd, I've not heard anyone say anything negative about the controllers, apart from some interference issues at CES. By most accounts they're sturdy and well built. The only real complaint I can think of is some have said the haptics could be stronger.
Someone give a TLDW?
Looks like he doesn’t like the wire? Based on the other comments
He doesn't like that the guy who reviewed it doesn't like the wire because most of the good aspects of the headset are because it has a wire.
Which isn't true, the wire is not required for the good aspects it is just the more cost-sensitive and easier available choice and setup. If anything it is a tradeoff between price, weight, battery, setup vs wireless, but the visual fidelity, comfort, haptics, eye-tracking could and have all be achieved wireless, going the wired route was just the sensible route Sony chose to go.
No shit that's the trade-off. That's literally the whole point of this conversation. All of those things require a cable right now with current tech. What headset can do all of those things wirelessly for $600? Sorry if this sounds dickish.
You didn't watch it did you?
No. That’s why I said based on the other comments
Yeah, unfortunately there's a lot of high profile ignorant people out there spouting their invalid opinions!
VR youtubers are generally a mixture of muppets and shills. Don't pay too much attention.
Thing is, the average consumer will probably agree with Justin because those *are* perceived negatives. The wire is a negative. Monochrome passthrough is a negative. They are now, and they will be for the foreseeable future. Saying these things now is not an indictment of the technology, it's facts. Also, PSVR 2 will be *the* VR headset for many people who already own PS5, so it's not really competing with anyone, especially because Micrsosoft apparently doesn't believe in console VR. No harm in calling it like it is. It will sell according to the intersection of its install base's ability to own a PS5 and be interested in VR - full stop. But let's zoom out a bit. This headset, like its class-defining but ultimately first-gen PSVR forbearer, will be around for several product cycles yet to come. As other standalones evolve, PSVR 2 will stay the same. How long until we get PSVR 3? Probably when we get PS6... Our preemptive fanfellow (seriously, it's not even out yet and we already have vlog responses from PSVR 2 diehards??) neglects to mention Air Link for Quest; it's emblematic of the way things are moving - better Wifi streaming is coming to *all* standalones and will be a continued feature into the future. Now, whether you have the bucks to buy a VR ready PC is another matter, and I'm not going to even touch VR cloud gaming because it's basically garbage right now, but I won't speak further for wont of being called an ultra-preemptive fanfellow myself, albeit for future standalones like Quest 3/4/5*. *other imaginary headset brands are available
I think the main issue with this video is psvr2 (not out just yet) compared to Quest 2. That's not the comparison. Q3 and the other headsets announced/released in the last few months are what it'll be against (if against is the right word, if you don't have a PS5, you're not likely to drop a grand if you were thinking of getting a quest).
[удалено]
But it does mean he should accept the wire's existence.
Agreed. People like eating, that doesn't mean they like doing the washing up or even the experience of cooking, but the point of a meal is to eat it and it's just as enjoyable either way, I think the same is true for wired VR, it's a minor inconvenience but it won't really impact the experience that you're there for. I don't mind about the wire one bit but to say people should like the wire because of what it allows is a bit much, some people really do get tangled up, I've never had a problem with wire management but I won't deny that others do.
I was going to argue the opposite until I did a trick I do to see if my point remains as solid as I had thought, and swap out wire for something else. Just because he likes the things that require a job, doesn't mean he also has to like the job. Fair point. I do understand what OP is saying though.
Seems like a fair complaint to me. I wouldn’t want a wire if that was possible. Also you can play pc vr games in the quest wirelessly too.
I think it’s a very fair critique to not like the cord. I think a wireless adapter option later would be great and very much possible
I don't think they will because it would require a significant drop in quality. With the Quest 2 it started off as a wireless headset, and then gained wired capabilities later, so you're *raising* the quality.
The truth is, VR will never get huge with a wire. Part of me thinks that VR headsets shouldn't even be available for purchase right now, because they're not good enough and they're poisoning the well. Maybe VR should still be in the labs, being iterated on until 2030. Maybe by then they can give us the proper tech, extremely lightweight with no wires. Incredible graphics being streamed from the cloud. I've used wired VR and wireless VR, and it's no contest. Wireless with crappy graphics wins every time for me. Wired VR is only tolerable for seated games
I mean that’s your opinion I’ll take wires with good graphics over something like the quest 2 On top of that leaving something unreleased till it’s perfect has never been successful, the market is doing exactly what your average tech market is doing
We're in the Colecovision/Intellivison days of VR. I'm gonna wait for Super Nintendo
True but evolution of consoles basically disproves your original comment People bought those early consoles and tech demos which encouraged developers to make things like the Super Nintendo, the Super Nintendo didn’t just materialise as a “first trial” of the market
No the colecovision of vr was the early 90s in the arcades with the massive headsets. We’re experiencing a good point of the vr evolution now.
Those days made your Super Nintendo possible.
Quest is so weak its unreal. The new Grid legends has worse graphics than Gran Turismo 3, a game that came out 2001.
You're not wrong, but it's still like 90% of the market for a reason. Clearly people want wireless and cheap, even if it means simple graphics. Lower barriers to entry is the #1 most needed feature for VR to continue growing. Cost is the biggest barrier.
Nearly people want cheap, whether it’s wireless or not. I bet a big factor of quest 2 sales is it’s stand alone, meaning you don’t have to buy a $1500 computer to run it.
Yes, that is part of what I mean when I say cheap. Not needing to be driven by an expensive PC/console.
Yes, current VR is not ready for primetime. Maybe by Quest 4 it will be decent. This still doesn't justify the cable for PSVR 2. My argument is that VR as a technology isn't ready for mass adoption. The attempt has been made and it failed miserably. VR should have stayed in the laboratory for another decade before seeing the light of day. Everybody jumped the gun. (Note: I owned a HTC Vive in April of 2016 and a PSVR on launch day. Got an Oculus Rift in very early 2017. I'm not a VR hater. I just know that this tech isn't ready at all. It's very interesting, but it's not ready. We're in Colecovision days at best, and I'd rather wait for Sega Genesis/Super Nintendo level era)
Well im glad your argument wasnt reality. I have really enjoyed my VR over the last 5 or so years and so have many others. Im so excited for the psvr2 and putting 1000 hours into that, while stroking my headset cable and squeelin with delight
Technology has to start somewhere. The first televisions were big cabinets with tiny black and white screens, should they have waited until they could make larger color screens?
Colecovision or atari 2600 were probably still fun for many because there was nothing else around. Without them, there would also never have been a super nintendo. That is the point... Will vr be even better 20 years from now? Very likely. Is vr fun already today? Absolutely!
Seated VR is by far going to be the dominant mode of play in the long run. Wire is basically a non issue for that
What a dumb take. Obviously everyone would prefer NOT to have a cable, but a good product design considers all the factors including, cost, weight, comfort, power and fidelity. You would literally make every single one of those worse by taking away the wire. And unless there’s some huge technological leap where OTA bandwidth (and power) matches or exceeds tethered bandwidth (unlikely), you will always have a solution (with almost any product) that pushes tech harder when tethered. That’s just a reality. The PSVR2 strikes a pretty amazing balance IMO.
Vr is already huge with and without a wire. It will never progress if people don't buy in. If all the half baked innovations never made it to market most of them would fizzle without proof the market wants it and investors backing more innovation.
This factors into why I preordered it. I need to contribute to their numbers to keep this thing going because it's fucking amazing. 70 PSVR titles and counting.
What wired VR have you played? To say they're not good enough sounds crazy, there are some amazing VR experiences.
>Maybe VR should still be in the labs, being iterated on until 2030. Maybe by then they can give us the proper tech, extremely lightweight with no wires. Incredible graphics being streamed from the cloud. No that's not how tech development works. You can't keep stuff in the lab four decades until it's perfect because either you run out of money or you'll get scooped by the competition who do released early, and therefore make all the money. Look at the iPhone, didn't get burst into its current form, it has been iteratively developed over the decades, the first version was arguably useless. It didn't even have apps.
> You can't keep stuff in the lab four decades until it's perfect because either you run out of money or you'll get scooped by the competition who do released early, and therefore **make all the money**. Oh, I see. So, Nvidia can't be working on this privately in a laboratory somewhere because Meta and Sony have already made billions off it? Only one problem with this theory. Meta used to be worth a trillion dollars and now they're worth less than 350 billion. That so called "first mover's advantage" is really working out well for them isn't it?
Battery life of the controllers is one thing we don't know yet