https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnjHsT8RkwI

Just announced, Playstation VR game.

Color me slightly intrigued just because of who's involved. But since I don't own a PS4 and this says basically nothing about the gameplay (other than the fact that it uses PlayStation VR), I'm not exactly super-hyped yet. Good to know they're actually working on a thing, though.

- No text -

I'm pleasantly surprised it is not a mobile game. Can't wait to hear more about it

I'm surprised to see something so soon. Watching this, with the childs movements matching the Golem, I couldn't help but think of all the internal horror stories that befell Star wars Kinect. Perhaps the movements are just to imply the factor of immersion, or even the story it's self? ...Or maybe I'm just being waaaay too picky about a reveal trailer. >_>

Sounded pretty good though. ;)

Color me slightly intrigued just because of who's involved. But since I don't own a PS4 and this says basically nothing about the gameplay (other than the fact that it uses PlayStation VR), I'm not exactly super-hyped yet. Good to know they're actually working on a thing, though.

Be skeptical. VR sucks except for specific circumstances. And then it's impossibly awesome.

If you control it with PS Move then it should easily be a hundred times more accurate than Kinect. It's basically the same tech as those ball suits designed for motion capture, plus a decent amount of buttons on the rest of the controller. And it one of the guys mentioned on their website has a decent amount of Move experience. Highwire only formed in June-ish of this year as far as I can tell, so I'm not all that surprised at some missing polish.

I doubt I'll ever see enough value in this PlayStation VR to invest the probably $300+ it'll cost, plus two Move controllers. I feel like it makes a lot more sense to pick up a PC headset that will probably have a LOT more support than a console one.

Holy CRAP. It will cost that much?! Man, VR is nutso expensive. I played a Virtualboy once. Didn't seem to be worth $300!

I haven't really seen prices floating around yet but Oculus Rift said it would be over $350 a couple months back. I would think it could only go so low. You need a fairly decent screen in there, with hardware strong enough to produce a high resolution image to both halves at a high framerate (aiming for 90! FPS). I don't really see how that is going to be feasible with the PS4's hardware. With VR most(all?) of the processing work is still done through the PC. Some Sony multiplats have been suffering on framerate when locked to 1080p as is.

On top of that, while some games were shown with a Dualshock 4 as a controller, a bunch have been using 2 Moves, similar to the Oculus' recent addition of 2 hand controllers. If they aren't bundled, they used to be $40 each, though I haven't seen a new one in quite some time.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2988182/gadgets/oculus-rift-consumer-price-will-be-more-than-350.html

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2015/11/20/playstation-vr-sony-talks-frame-rate/

Yeah, I was wondering about that as well. PCs capable of seemingly ideal VR are almost cartoonishly expensive. They have to render 1920x1080 twice at at least 60 FPS. However, using a much more simple 800x480 resolution, it would be reasonable, I think. I simply cannot imagine the PS4, with performance about equivalent to a gaming PC with $300 in parts (source: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/g27kpg , virtually identical to my build which outperforms my console...slightly), being able to keep up with that.

Yeah, I was wondering about that as well. PCs capable of seemingly ideal VR are almost cartoonishly expensive. They have to render 1920x1080 twice at at least 60 FPS. However, using a much more simple 800x480 resolution, it would be reasonable, I think. I simply cannot imagine the PS4, with performance about equivalent to a gaming PC with $300 in parts (source: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/g27kpg , virtually identical to my build which outperforms my console...slightly), being able to keep up with that.

I'll bet a PS4 could get 600 fps in Quake 3.

You simply create a game that's not demanding on the system. You can render 120fps in 8K if your image is simple enough and your CPU doesn't have a ton to do.

You simply create a game that's not demanding on the system. You can render 120fps in 8K if your image is simple enough and your CPU doesn't have a ton to do.

You know that's not what most people want, though. I think most have unrealistic expectations of what VR can and will do right now. They want games that look as good or better than current AAA games. Have fun pricing out a PC that can handle that!

I'm as interested in VR as anyone. I've had very little experience with it, a few ten minute sessions at a buddy's house, and it was amazing in the right circumstances. I'm hopeful for what it will be able to do . . . eventually.

It'll still be a long time before it puts out the kind of content most people expect at a reasonable price tag.

- No text -

Nice to see those familiar faces. :)

- No text -

- No text -

Good luck, Marty, Jaime, Vic & co.!

That said... two things:

1. Does 3d Audio = binaural?

2. This. I'm taking this.

That said... two things:

1. Does 3d Audio = binaural?

I don't know, but positional audio is a huge thing that I didn't see (or rather hear) when I went to VR con. It's more distracting than you think to turn your head and not have the sounds move. Hopefully this will be part of Golem.

1. Does 3d Audio = binaural?

I hope so, or more so this in addition to positional audio that changes with your head orientation.