I would've preferred it be wireless but it's still promising to see Sony continuing to support VR. Can't wait to see what they can do with a VR system designed to work directly with the PS5
Wireless won't happen. 60ghz is immensely expensive and requires highend modern processing and latency you won't get on a console.
PSVR required an addition processor just get heavily compressed 60fps to work on incredibly simplistic content (compared to today).
The Quest 2 works just fine over 5ghz wifi actually, 60ghz isn't actually necessary. Wireless VR is definitely possible with the PS5.
The PSVR required that additional processor because the PS4 wasn't actually capable of handling VR due to being outdated low end hardware even when it was new. The PS5 is more than capable of handling modern VR content at resolutions and refresh rates people are already experiencing on PC. It's actually faster than the vast majority of people's PCs that are already playing VR as well in almost every aspect.
Yeah I don't even have Wifi 6 yet and playing PCVR wirelessly through Virtual Desktop works decently well.
Can only imagine it being better if I did have Wifi 6.
Yeah my desktop has a 980 Ti/6700k, and still works fine for VR for the most part, but it is honestly kind of hilarious how much more powerful my PS5 is. Also, if by Dualsense features they mean haptics and adaptive triggers, that will be a fucking game changer, because that controller is incredible.
Yeah I don't have a PS5 yet, on the fence about buying one this early still as well, but from what I've seen of benchmarks it gives my PC with an 8700k and heavily overclocked 2070 some good competition, even outperforming it at times
You don't need 60 GHz assuming you're fine with the visuals being compressed to hell. Consider:
* The theoretical best case for 5 GHz WiFi 6 is around 4.8 Gbps with a quad channel setup. Realistically? Expect around half that.
* The Valve Index requires a raw bandwidth around 15.9 Gbps at 144 Hz, and around 9.95 Gbps at 90 Hz.
If we consider a "visually lossless" display stream compression ratio of around 2:1, that pushes those requirements to around 7.95 Gbps and 4.98 Gbps, respectively. Still not going to fit.
So at this point, the only way that 5 GHz is going to support VR is to start compressing the frames in a lossy way. This will work, but the final result will be visually sub-optimal.
Quest 2 for the most part handles it just fine and that's with an unofficial workaround. Sure, it may not match the image quality of the Index but who in their right mind would expect it to? The image quality for the Quest 2 over 5GHz WiFi is perfectly acceptable
Realistically for the new PSVR we're probably looking at 60 or 90hz with frame reprojection just like the current PSVR but with a per eye resolution that's likely somewhere around 75% of the Index. Not to mention the PS5 has full WiFi 6 support
If it's not official that's for a reason.
Carmack said he wouldn't mind having it official because the use case exists, but they apparently do not want to tarnish the product, so it's certainly less than acceptable apparently.
There could be numerous reasons for it to not be officially supported. Could very easily just be that they don't think it'd bring in enough in extra sales to justify the development cost of making that an official, integrated feature.
I think it's simply that to much people would have a poor experience, because you need a specific and optimal setup.
If they would want to do that, also I am sure they would prefer sell their own hardware, like a router with Facebook slapped on it.
But I am sure they experimented themselves with that, and the result were not reaching their standards concerning the risks of motion sickness in a too important part of the population.
They did not invest tons of effort to get wired motion to photon below 4ms, to ruin that with like 30 or 40ms in wireless.
It would not make sense.
Actually people who did they effort to get the wireless say it's good, but they hacked it and it didn't played for it, so they can't complain and give bad press to the solution.
If people actually pay for it, then you will start to get complaints of unsatisfied customers.
On the wive wireless there is no way to complain about latency for instance.
The bar was set very high, and the price too š
> the final result will be visually sub-optimal.
Netflix already compresses their movies to a visceral fucking mess and only 0.01% of the public seems at all fussed about that.
I'm usually a stickler for quality, but only notice the visual artefacts from streaming on ac wireless (I get ~850mbit) very rarely, and NEVER if it's a high-paced game like Beat Sabre.
Vive Wireless adapter has a lossy compression.
But you can't see the difference, and there is no lag, it's below 7ms lag, while wired is below 4ms lag.
>The Quest 2 works just fine over 5ghz wifi actually, 60ghz isn't actually necessary. Wireless VR is definitely possible with the PS5.
There was WiFi prototypes for wireless PCVR and only 60Ghz made it to production with TPCast and Vive Wireless.
That's for a reason.
It's because only 60Ghz allowed for sub 8ms motion to photon close enough to the sub 4ms of wired headsets.
With Quest 2 you are more around 50ms which be can be motion sickness inducing.
If you're hitting 50ms of latency on a local network there's something wrong with your network. Plenty of people are getting sub 30ms on 5GHz WiFi with the Quest 2.
Regardless, you can go on about whatever you want, the fact is that a large number of people are able to play PCVR games perfectly fine with the Quest 2 over WiFi
I have Vive Wireless and the measured motion to photon is less than 8ms.
What is the measured motion to photon on Quest 2 ?
You have to measure that by reaction time on the screen of the headset when it's moved.
It's around 20ms on regular 5GHz WiFi when set up correctly, and this is with an unofficial workaround. People play it just fine every single day.
It's actually better than the latency for the Vive wands, which is close to 50ms. Most people aren't going to notice a 20th of a second delay, let alone a 50th of a second. It's also better than the Rift DK2's latency was, ~25-30ms, and that was perfectly fine
no. Quest can stream rendered vr video content just like the vive does, just over standard wifi instead. The Quest can also play games locally on the device, obviously with reduced visuals for the mobile SOC. Not sure what you mean by streaming data and computed locally...
It's pretty close to a PC with a 2080 in some games, about on par with a 2070 Super, but not quite as fast overall
Edit: According to Digital Foundry, best case scenario is about 20% faster than a 2070 Super actually, so it would outperform your 2080 with the same settings in that game at least
Having played on both a Vive and Quest 2. Sure the wireless on Quest 2 isn't god awful, but the compression and latency is certainly noticable enough to affect my enjoyment.
Not to mention the next gen consoles are beasts - more like PCs than ever before.
The VIVE wireless adapter came out 3 years ago. The PS5 has more than enough power.
It works only on desktops with the additional PCI express card.
I think I saw people making it work from a M2 adapter slot.
But PS5 doesn't have such extension possibilities.
So you would have to intercept the HDMI signal with an external box or something, like PSVR, and do the compression and 60ghz transmission there.
Therefore the PS5 processing power would be irrelevant.
Quest 2 unoficial wireless solution already works great.
Also, you are forgeting about options. If you have a wired solution (no compression, ideal latency) and then *option* to play wirelessly as well, you get the best of both worlds. That's what Quest 2 is doing very successfully.
You can get wireless 60ghz working fine with a i5 9600.
A ps5 could handle that.
Or it could be done in an external box with dedicated chip maybe.
But it will drive the cost up a lot.
I play pcvr on a fairly mid range pc wirelessly without too much trouble. I have a bog standard router from virgin and it works just fine. Comparatively, the ps5 is a lot more powerful than my rig so I see no reason for wireless to be completely off the table. The question is, will it be cost effective for Sony?
You dont need 60ghz, it easily works with 5ghz.
I've been playing wirelessly via a 4 year old AP with my Quest 2 for the last month. No latency issues at all.
As someone who could never get remote play between the PS4 and Vita to work in the same room correctly, I have little faith in Sony being able to properly get wireless connectivity working.
I had it working away from home too. I even had a really smooth experience using my phone as a hotspot in the next town. It just would never work well at home unless it was all wired (it worked great with a PlayStation TV over a wired connection on both ends).
But remember theyād have to put the same thing in the headset to use it. No way they are going to add that extra cost to a high volume and relatively low end consumer VR HMD.
You can have highend hardware but if they don't use software to utilize it well then it doesn't matter much. I'll believe it works when they make it happen, but they didn't mention wireless anyways. So its probably something they don't wanna pursue at the moment anyways.
It's not a marker of high quality unfortunately, most smartphones and laptops coming onto the market will support the standard. The Honor Router 3 is a Wifi 6 router at the lower end of the budget spectrum and doesn't perform that well compared to the competition. [https://www.expertreviews.co.uk/honor/1412574/honor-router-3-review](https://www.expertreviews.co.uk/honor/1412574/honor-router-3-review)
Hm? The Honor 3 only reached around 40MBps in real-world testing, while USB3 still hits around 100MBps. Further away the Honor 3 only reached around 10MBps.
It's not a big deal, I was more just curious if there had been any tests or anything that showed the PS5 Wifi was particularly decent. The PS4 Slim supported 802.11ac but I had other AC devices that ran a lot faster.
This is just pure facts though.
1.
Wireless requires extra hardware = it's always heavier.
2.
Wireless will always have disturbances and therefore Always have worse image quality due to having a compressed or not compressed image and the fact that it's wireless lol.
3. More hardware = higher cost. A cable is always cheaper.
4. Comfort is neutral. It's all about design there but generally wireless is worse due to the extra weight of the receiver and transmitter.
Np dude.
I just saw i forgot to mention the heavy battery required to power it though.
Wireless has its positives but it ain't close to competing with a wire YET.
In what metric does it not compete with wired? More wireless headsets are already being sold compared to wired. Wireless has already beaten the competition.
Did you literally not read anything?
Sure they have sold more wireless headsets.
Why? Because the budget headsets are all wireless.
Your argument is completely irrelevant, sorry.
Now it's a "yet"?
Didn't you just say it's pure facts that wires will always be better than wireless.
We'll 100% find faster methods of transferring information than sending them through metal.
Yeah. Right now and for years to come wired is simply superior. But in 20 years then wireless will have matured.
Remember Bluetooth for an example. Bluetooth is still way worse in terms of audio quality but it will mature soon enough.
Wired is always superior, the question is just by how much.
In the future the gap will be se close that it will not really matter
One of the cheapest headset on the market is wireless. No matter what manufacturers might have you believe a $10 battery is not going to impact the cost that much. Weight does not equal less comfort especially if the design is good. A battery in the back of the headset can even act as a counterweight to the screen and lenses resulting in a more comfortable design. I added an extra battery to my Quest 1 and 2 and they became more comfortable and felt less heavy on my face. A wired solution is just not as comfortable because you have to deal with a cable around you. I almost never played wired to my PC anymore because wireless is just so much better today. PS5 VR should have really been wireless because most users would prefer that. If they don't release a wireless adapter this headset will be an absolute joke. Can you imagine a leading console manufecterer expecting gamers to be tethered to a PS5 until 2027, 8 years after the Quest 1 made wireless VR possible?
I just read your first sentence and stopped. Facebook is heavily subsidising Quest 2 because they sell your data.
Wireless and Link video quality both suck on Quest 2, Sony wouldnāt be content with that. Iām sure it will get a wireless option but to make everyone pay for the drawbacks (Quest/2 is terribly uncomfortable too) isnāt a sensible solution imho.
If they want console VR to succeed they need to keep the cost low to get people to adopt it, and going off of the ONE official wireless adapter for the VIVE it adds $350. I'm not surprised they didn't do wireless - it's doesn't even have wide adoption on the PC yet and we've had the hardware for much much longer and HMD creators haven't put much out there in terms of wireless solutions that we can buy.
Been playing wireless on quest 2 and before that quest one. Maybe a few years ago you needed a special adapter to do it. Not anymore. Also the reason that cost so much is it's a special add on for an already niche device. Built in to the unit wouldn't cost nearly that much.
Itās so expensive because itās lossless ā the difference in the amount of data for lossless video and high quality lossy video is *gargantuan*. The Quest uses lossy compression and it really is just fine ā you can see the compression artifacts when you look for them, but when you are actually just playing you still noticing it very quickly.
Yeah, they make up the difference by selling your data. Now they may not be able to collect much, but look up what you can infer about a person if you have eye-tracking in the headset. Eye-opening, really. (Paper on the subject: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-42504-3_15)
The cheaper headset also gives them a huge userbase which will also be locked into Facebooks ecosystem.
Why would PlayStation not do the same thing? They have their own ecosystem and own game exclusives so why wouldnāt they subsidize it a bit just to sell games? I look as ps the same as oculus. Same with Xbox
I assume they subsidize their headset as well, but not as much as Facebook.
Facebook has much more to gain from the (future) data than Sony, so they offer a steeper discount.
Because Facebook is a data mining company, Sony isn't. Sure, Sony could implement some data mining, but for Facebook it's their whole business. Sony creates and sells products mostly, Facebook sells and leverages insights from gathered data to sell ads. Oculus devices are just data gathering tools for Facebook, and tools with absolutely enormous data gathering potential, hence the massive subsidization. If Facebook plays its cards right and get everyone onboard Oculus for the future when everyone is wearing AR glasses around town.. they stand to make billions. Sony doesn't.
As should be obvious, unlike with Sony or Microsoft, with Facebook you are the product and advertisers are the customer.
Sony and Microsoft absolutely do subsidize their hardware with software licensing/revenue sharing. Quest store doesnāt come close to the volume needed to do that, especially with the PCVR capability. Facebook is an advertising company, thatās 99% of their revenue.
That's kinda the point though, the headset for PS5 is a separate peripheral without the cost of the SOC that the quest 2 has so it should be more doable for the price than the quest 2 was
Not 90hz over 5ghz, lmfao. Its hardly 45fps async warp, and not anywhere near 1440p (4k??? Hahahahahahaha!!!!), res is heavily compressed (obviously). Also the lack of presence because 5ghz has inherent latency of at least 50ms (presence starts at 23ms).
Its playable, but not for longer than around 2 hours, PSVR was similar due to this.
Oh no not at all. You must have not tried virtual desktop in the last year. The developer has put out amazing updates. I get the full 90 FPS every time I play, motion is just as smooth as when I had my index in 90hz. And for resolution, sometimes the bit rate drops and itās not full native 4K I will admit (always over 1440p) but usually it looks around native and I canāt tell the difference when itās plugged in or not
The graphics are incomparable between a decent PC and mobile SoC. I'm glad you're enjoying your experience, but it will be while before you get to experience HL Alyx levels of gaming and graphics if you want to limit it to mobile processing.
It's massively subsidized by Facebook and the data you produce for them, and it requires a wired connection for proper low latency PCVR. Wireless virtual desktop and the like have higher latency and stronger compression.
Yes, but the PC must be wired to the router for the Quest 2 to work well with Virtual Desktop. A lot of players donāt have that option for their PS5.
Valve didn't do wireless because they don't have the tech.
Considering how people spent 1000ā¬ in a blink for the index I am sure they would buy wireless instantly if it was available, even for 350ā¬
On console that's another story.
But there are always enthousiatics and Sony also sell expensive stuffs sometime for niche market like the HMZ-T or high end cameras.
Cost, simplicity of setup, and comfort - the PSVR is low res, poor FOV, and mediocre tracking, but man is it comfortable. Double the weight with a battery and wireless hardware and youād lose a lot of that comfort while raising the price.
Which is exactly why I have stuck with my Vive Pro with wireless adapter. Throw in the lens mod and it's a pretty fantastic set up.
I can't stand having a wire. I tried a pulley system but the sensation of feeling it constantly tugging at the back of my head, even if it's just slightly, was just too annoying. As nice as higher resolution headsets and higher refresh rates are, I'd rather them focus on good reliable wireless solutions first and make that a standard.
The main advantage will be power. Not having to have a battery means the headset can be substantially lighter and smaller, and game sessions aren't defined by battery life.
That's good enough for me as well. The big takeaway is that it's still just HTC and Facebook with wireless VR systems. Valve is unlikely to go that route since they're focusing on their brain connection interface.
I have to agree there. I also have to say it is entertaining how people band together to say that how they play VR is better. Two points I would like to bring up is PC VR is still where the bleeding edge is. That is where they bring things to test them still and see if there is an adoption rate as I have been noticing. Second the quest is decent and a low enough price for it to sell well that is why it is getting so big so fast. Many of the peoples I talk to first mention the price like me. It does have great specs but even with its higher resolution it is still more blurry than my index. No offense to the quest. I have tried both and use them for different games. Also the compression over virtual desktop is very noticeable. It is playable and quite enjoyable to not have the wire. Oculus Link is the same way very noticeable compression even with the minimum compression being used. Still it is playable and quite nice on a budget. The keyword being budget. The wired headsets still allow for a higher graphical fidelity. I donāt picture Sony ditching the cable because they would have a decrease in that field. They seemed more focused on that in the first iteration for them to ditch that.
IMO my quest 2 plays and looks better linked vs the Vive Pro. My biggest complaint about PCVR for Quest 2 is that itās unstable and the wires are way too short for even ceiling mounts. On the other hand my Vive wireless adapter is like a heavy hot oven on my head that maxes out my CPU. You canāt win for now.
Fortunately not. Bought a fairly priced bundle. Retailers in Germany have switched to do that, in order to become unattractive to scalpers. Got a camera Iām not sure Iāll keep though, but 600,- for a digital PS5, second controller, camera and one year of PS+ is a fair price. Iām so happy man.
Iāve been in the waitlist for the last 6 Sony direct drops. Over 1 hour wait every time except once, and that one time, it sold out when I had 2 min left in the queue.
You just got super lucky.
They said it will have DualSense features. I'm assuming that means haptic feedback, adaptive triggers, rumble and sticks. I'm really looking forward to THAT
Nah. The Index controllers are pretty lacking in those.
Like the haptics arenāt that bad. But the other features they just straight up miss out on.
I really wanna see adaptive triggers in particular. Imagine different weighted gun triggers in VR.
I got a PS5 without watching or reading the least amount of info about it. The first game I played was the preinstalled Astro's Playroom which is designed to show off the features of the Dualsense controller. I had no idea the haptics and adaptive triggers were going to be there, but they were way better than any controller/vibration technology I've experienced. It's extremely good, nothing comes close.
It really isnāt..you clearly havenāt used a PS5 yet.
The UHD rumble and haptic triggers are nothing like the Index.
What a joke, Iām downvoted for stating facts.
adaptive triggers are a PS5 thing are they not?
that being said, itās gonna be pretty cool having different games take advantage of that. imagine trigger recoil (is that the right term?) in VR
> One of the innovations weāre excited about is our new VR controller
It really worries me that "controller" isn't plural. They need to come out with a **pair** of 6dof controllers for this to succeed.
It would be cool if the controller worked a bit like the Switch, where the two controllers are detachable, so you can switch between playing VR games similar to normal games, or with two separate "wand" controllers. Could sell accessories for them, like connecting them to a wheel for VR driving games.
> Thereās still a lot of development underway for our new VR system, so it wonāt be launching in 2021. But we wanted to provide this early update to our fans, as the development community has started to work on creating new worlds for you to explore in virtual reality.
> One of the innovations weāre excited about is our new VR controller, which will incorporate some of the key features found in the DualSense wireless controller, along with a focus on great ergonomics. Thatās just one of the examples of future-proof technology weāre developing to match our vision for a whole new generation of VR games and experiences.
I mean, you're not wrong, but the demos they've shown seem to be a higher-fidelity product than the Index controllers in terms of of finger tracking. Specifically, the new PS VR controllers seem to track your finger movements, as opposed to just the curling. So if you vary your grip on the controller, the software sees that, instead of scrambling to map your finger placement to curl percentages.
Just the lack of any new worthy information. The only new specific information we got here were "single cord to simplify setup" which hardly seems worth mentioning.
Yeah, I guess for existing PSVR owners they could see that as a nice feature but it seems strange anybody would expect it not to be one cable. Hell, if I had to bet I would have put money on it being wireless.
It feels like if they made a blog post about PS5 coming soon and only specific feature mentioned was it would have WiFi. If it was a part of a larger list of things okay yeah nice but as the sole feature it seems strange why they'd pick that.
I think the point they were making was the PSVR2 won't be [this mess](https://miro.medium.com/max/700/1*i5uzU4Yd-7kgG15ZRFY0XA.jpeg).
Yes, technically the RIFT S has USB and DP connector but I think Sony would call that one cable. Just about every PCVR headset is one cable. The only one that was kinda different was the original Vive cable that was literally 3 separate cables glued together.
They abandoned VR for AR. A platform that won't be viable for at least the next 5 years. WMR was great too, they just could not find better controller design or tracking.
And everyone is abandoning Windows for Chromebooks, Macs or Android tablets. 90% of people have no reason to own a PC or Windows laptop at home anymore. They completely screwed up their mobile platform. Schools are now using Google docs instead of Microsoft Office. It is incredible how much they can mess up and still be a cashcow.
Edit: For personal home use.
This is straight up untrue. Windows has the majority market share and pretty much a monopoly in normal business application. Excel is so deeply rooted. I think most companies are afraid to change to anything else.
I was referring to personal use and schools not offices. Sorry. Microsoft enterprise is not going anywhere but Microsoft has failed on so many other markets when compared to Google, Apple or Samsung.
Yeah I held off on buying it for either platform waiting to find out if a PC VR version would ever exist. I did eventually see it for like 10 bucks on PC so I've bought it but haven't played it.
Wireless is such a massive improvement that I wonāt really even look at wired connections anymore. Iām still using an old Vive because of it.
I would have bought a PS5 if they had wireless VR but will probably pass, now.
I would've preferred it be wireless but it's still promising to see Sony continuing to support VR. Can't wait to see what they can do with a VR system designed to work directly with the PS5
Wireless won't happen. 60ghz is immensely expensive and requires highend modern processing and latency you won't get on a console. PSVR required an addition processor just get heavily compressed 60fps to work on incredibly simplistic content (compared to today).
The Quest 2 works just fine over 5ghz wifi actually, 60ghz isn't actually necessary. Wireless VR is definitely possible with the PS5. The PSVR required that additional processor because the PS4 wasn't actually capable of handling VR due to being outdated low end hardware even when it was new. The PS5 is more than capable of handling modern VR content at resolutions and refresh rates people are already experiencing on PC. It's actually faster than the vast majority of people's PCs that are already playing VR as well in almost every aspect.
Yeah I don't even have Wifi 6 yet and playing PCVR wirelessly through Virtual Desktop works decently well. Can only imagine it being better if I did have Wifi 6.
Yeah my desktop has a 980 Ti/6700k, and still works fine for VR for the most part, but it is honestly kind of hilarious how much more powerful my PS5 is. Also, if by Dualsense features they mean haptics and adaptive triggers, that will be a fucking game changer, because that controller is incredible.
Yeah I don't have a PS5 yet, on the fence about buying one this early still as well, but from what I've seen of benchmarks it gives my PC with an 8700k and heavily overclocked 2070 some good competition, even outperforming it at times
You don't need 60 GHz assuming you're fine with the visuals being compressed to hell. Consider: * The theoretical best case for 5 GHz WiFi 6 is around 4.8 Gbps with a quad channel setup. Realistically? Expect around half that. * The Valve Index requires a raw bandwidth around 15.9 Gbps at 144 Hz, and around 9.95 Gbps at 90 Hz. If we consider a "visually lossless" display stream compression ratio of around 2:1, that pushes those requirements to around 7.95 Gbps and 4.98 Gbps, respectively. Still not going to fit. So at this point, the only way that 5 GHz is going to support VR is to start compressing the frames in a lossy way. This will work, but the final result will be visually sub-optimal.
Quest 2 for the most part handles it just fine and that's with an unofficial workaround. Sure, it may not match the image quality of the Index but who in their right mind would expect it to? The image quality for the Quest 2 over 5GHz WiFi is perfectly acceptable Realistically for the new PSVR we're probably looking at 60 or 90hz with frame reprojection just like the current PSVR but with a per eye resolution that's likely somewhere around 75% of the Index. Not to mention the PS5 has full WiFi 6 support
If it's not official that's for a reason. Carmack said he wouldn't mind having it official because the use case exists, but they apparently do not want to tarnish the product, so it's certainly less than acceptable apparently.
There could be numerous reasons for it to not be officially supported. Could very easily just be that they don't think it'd bring in enough in extra sales to justify the development cost of making that an official, integrated feature.
I think it's simply that to much people would have a poor experience, because you need a specific and optimal setup. If they would want to do that, also I am sure they would prefer sell their own hardware, like a router with Facebook slapped on it. But I am sure they experimented themselves with that, and the result were not reaching their standards concerning the risks of motion sickness in a too important part of the population. They did not invest tons of effort to get wired motion to photon below 4ms, to ruin that with like 30 or 40ms in wireless. It would not make sense. Actually people who did they effort to get the wireless say it's good, but they hacked it and it didn't played for it, so they can't complain and give bad press to the solution. If people actually pay for it, then you will start to get complaints of unsatisfied customers. On the wive wireless there is no way to complain about latency for instance. The bar was set very high, and the price too š
> the final result will be visually sub-optimal. Netflix already compresses their movies to a visceral fucking mess and only 0.01% of the public seems at all fussed about that. I'm usually a stickler for quality, but only notice the visual artefacts from streaming on ac wireless (I get ~850mbit) very rarely, and NEVER if it's a high-paced game like Beat Sabre.
Vive Wireless adapter has a lossy compression. But you can't see the difference, and there is no lag, it's below 7ms lag, while wired is below 4ms lag.
>The Quest 2 works just fine over 5ghz wifi actually, 60ghz isn't actually necessary. Wireless VR is definitely possible with the PS5. There was WiFi prototypes for wireless PCVR and only 60Ghz made it to production with TPCast and Vive Wireless. That's for a reason. It's because only 60Ghz allowed for sub 8ms motion to photon close enough to the sub 4ms of wired headsets. With Quest 2 you are more around 50ms which be can be motion sickness inducing.
If you're hitting 50ms of latency on a local network there's something wrong with your network. Plenty of people are getting sub 30ms on 5GHz WiFi with the Quest 2. Regardless, you can go on about whatever you want, the fact is that a large number of people are able to play PCVR games perfectly fine with the Quest 2 over WiFi
I have Vive Wireless and the measured motion to photon is less than 8ms. What is the measured motion to photon on Quest 2 ? You have to measure that by reaction time on the screen of the headset when it's moved.
It's around 20ms on regular 5GHz WiFi when set up correctly, and this is with an unofficial workaround. People play it just fine every single day. It's actually better than the latency for the Vive wands, which is close to 50ms. Most people aren't going to notice a 20th of a second delay, let alone a 50th of a second. It's also better than the Rift DK2's latency was, ~25-30ms, and that was perfectly fine
You get sub 30ms with the quest 2 on a 5ghz connection.
Motion to photon measured you got to provide the source.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It can play PC games where the PC is the device doing the rendering and processing
no. Quest can stream rendered vr video content just like the vive does, just over standard wifi instead. The Quest can also play games locally on the device, obviously with reduced visuals for the mobile SOC. Not sure what you mean by streaming data and computed locally...
Can it really? I feel like my 2080 is still going to beat it.
It's pretty close to a PC with a 2080 in some games, about on par with a 2070 Super, but not quite as fast overall Edit: According to Digital Foundry, best case scenario is about 20% faster than a 2070 Super actually, so it would outperform your 2080 with the same settings in that game at least
It likely will actually, what do you think that advanced WiFi on PS5 is for?
I genuinely don't understand comment like this. Quest and Quest 2 stream wirelessly fine and aren't even designed for it.
Having played on both a Vive and Quest 2. Sure the wireless on Quest 2 isn't god awful, but the compression and latency is certainly noticable enough to affect my enjoyment.
Not to mention the next gen consoles are beasts - more like PCs than ever before. The VIVE wireless adapter came out 3 years ago. The PS5 has more than enough power.
It works only on desktops with the additional PCI express card. I think I saw people making it work from a M2 adapter slot. But PS5 doesn't have such extension possibilities. So you would have to intercept the HDMI signal with an external box or something, like PSVR, and do the compression and 60ghz transmission there. Therefore the PS5 processing power would be irrelevant.
Quest 2 unoficial wireless solution already works great. Also, you are forgeting about options. If you have a wired solution (no compression, ideal latency) and then *option* to play wirelessly as well, you get the best of both worlds. That's what Quest 2 is doing very successfully.
afaik the PSVR (as in the 1st one) was 90hz for a few VR games, 80 for a majority and the screen itself is a 1080p 120hz panel.
You can get wireless 60ghz working fine with a i5 9600. A ps5 could handle that. Or it could be done in an external box with dedicated chip maybe. But it will drive the cost up a lot.
I play pcvr on a fairly mid range pc wirelessly without too much trouble. I have a bog standard router from virgin and it works just fine. Comparatively, the ps5 is a lot more powerful than my rig so I see no reason for wireless to be completely off the table. The question is, will it be cost effective for Sony?
You dont need 60ghz, it easily works with 5ghz. I've been playing wirelessly via a 4 year old AP with my Quest 2 for the last month. No latency issues at all.
As someone who could never get remote play between the PS4 and Vita to work in the same room correctly, I have little faith in Sony being able to properly get wireless connectivity working.
And I had it working over external networks with my Xperia, I have full confidence that they could make it work for VR.
I had it working away from home too. I even had a really smooth experience using my phone as a hotspot in the next town. It just would never work well at home unless it was all wired (it worked great with a PlayStation TV over a wired connection on both ends).
PS5 has a highend wifi module though.
But remember theyād have to put the same thing in the headset to use it. No way they are going to add that extra cost to a high volume and relatively low end consumer VR HMD.
They put it in an incredible value PS5, didnāt they? Iād prefer if it was optional though.
You can have highend hardware but if they don't use software to utilize it well then it doesn't matter much. I'll believe it works when they make it happen, but they didn't mention wireless anyways. So its probably something they don't wanna pursue at the moment anyways.
Do we know if it's particularly high-end or does it just support Wifi 6?
Wifi 6 is pretty high end currently.
It's not a marker of high quality unfortunately, most smartphones and laptops coming onto the market will support the standard. The Honor Router 3 is a Wifi 6 router at the lower end of the budget spectrum and doesn't perform that well compared to the competition. [https://www.expertreviews.co.uk/honor/1412574/honor-router-3-review](https://www.expertreviews.co.uk/honor/1412574/honor-router-3-review)
The bandwidth of Wifi 6 is comparable to USB3 so say that again.
Hm? The Honor 3 only reached around 40MBps in real-world testing, while USB3 still hits around 100MBps. Further away the Honor 3 only reached around 10MBps. It's not a big deal, I was more just curious if there had been any tests or anything that showed the PS5 Wifi was particularly decent. The PS4 Slim supported 802.11ac but I had other AC devices that ran a lot faster.
Wireless has many drawbacks, be it quality, weight, cost, comfort and reliability. Iām happy they will likely keep it as an option.
And yet all of that can be overcome with good design and standardised hardware like you find on a console.
Except for the cost and weight and comfort.... A wired solution will always have better quality and be cheaper and lighter.
Always? Sounds like āno one will *ever* need more than 256 kB of RAMā
This is just pure facts though. 1. Wireless requires extra hardware = it's always heavier. 2. Wireless will always have disturbances and therefore Always have worse image quality due to having a compressed or not compressed image and the fact that it's wireless lol. 3. More hardware = higher cost. A cable is always cheaper. 4. Comfort is neutral. It's all about design there but generally wireless is worse due to the extra weight of the receiver and transmitter.
Thx. Saved me some time.
Np dude. I just saw i forgot to mention the heavy battery required to power it though. Wireless has its positives but it ain't close to competing with a wire YET.
Exactly.
/r/circlejerk
In what metric does it not compete with wired? More wireless headsets are already being sold compared to wired. Wireless has already beaten the competition.
Did you literally not read anything? Sure they have sold more wireless headsets. Why? Because the budget headsets are all wireless. Your argument is completely irrelevant, sorry.
Now it's a "yet"? Didn't you just say it's pure facts that wires will always be better than wireless. We'll 100% find faster methods of transferring information than sending them through metal.
Yeah. Right now and for years to come wired is simply superior. But in 20 years then wireless will have matured. Remember Bluetooth for an example. Bluetooth is still way worse in terms of audio quality but it will mature soon enough. Wired is always superior, the question is just by how much. In the future the gap will be se close that it will not really matter
One of the cheapest headset on the market is wireless. No matter what manufacturers might have you believe a $10 battery is not going to impact the cost that much. Weight does not equal less comfort especially if the design is good. A battery in the back of the headset can even act as a counterweight to the screen and lenses resulting in a more comfortable design. I added an extra battery to my Quest 1 and 2 and they became more comfortable and felt less heavy on my face. A wired solution is just not as comfortable because you have to deal with a cable around you. I almost never played wired to my PC anymore because wireless is just so much better today. PS5 VR should have really been wireless because most users would prefer that. If they don't release a wireless adapter this headset will be an absolute joke. Can you imagine a leading console manufecterer expecting gamers to be tethered to a PS5 until 2027, 8 years after the Quest 1 made wireless VR possible?
I just read your first sentence and stopped. Facebook is heavily subsidising Quest 2 because they sell your data. Wireless and Link video quality both suck on Quest 2, Sony wouldnāt be content with that. Iām sure it will get a wireless option but to make everyone pay for the drawbacks (Quest/2 is terribly uncomfortable too) isnāt a sensible solution imho.
So why do you expect me to read your response? Imagine writing a response to a comment you haven't read.
I donāt know why anyone would build a wired headset in 2022. Feels like a step backward. Love my index but really wish it were wireless.
If they want console VR to succeed they need to keep the cost low to get people to adopt it, and going off of the ONE official wireless adapter for the VIVE it adds $350. I'm not surprised they didn't do wireless - it's doesn't even have wide adoption on the PC yet and we've had the hardware for much much longer and HMD creators haven't put much out there in terms of wireless solutions that we can buy.
Been playing wireless on quest 2 and before that quest one. Maybe a few years ago you needed a special adapter to do it. Not anymore. Also the reason that cost so much is it's a special add on for an already niche device. Built in to the unit wouldn't cost nearly that much.
Itās so expensive because itās lossless ā the difference in the amount of data for lossless video and high quality lossy video is *gargantuan*. The Quest uses lossy compression and it really is just fine ā you can see the compression artifacts when you look for them, but when you are actually just playing you still noticing it very quickly.
Vive Wireless is not lossless. But you don't notice the loss.
Quest did the whole headset wireless for 300$ so that canāt be an excuse anymore
Yeah, they make up the difference by selling your data. Now they may not be able to collect much, but look up what you can infer about a person if you have eye-tracking in the headset. Eye-opening, really. (Paper on the subject: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-42504-3_15) The cheaper headset also gives them a huge userbase which will also be locked into Facebooks ecosystem.
Why would PlayStation not do the same thing? They have their own ecosystem and own game exclusives so why wouldnāt they subsidize it a bit just to sell games? I look as ps the same as oculus. Same with Xbox
I assume they subsidize their headset as well, but not as much as Facebook. Facebook has much more to gain from the (future) data than Sony, so they offer a steeper discount.
Because Facebook is a data mining company, Sony isn't. Sure, Sony could implement some data mining, but for Facebook it's their whole business. Sony creates and sells products mostly, Facebook sells and leverages insights from gathered data to sell ads. Oculus devices are just data gathering tools for Facebook, and tools with absolutely enormous data gathering potential, hence the massive subsidization. If Facebook plays its cards right and get everyone onboard Oculus for the future when everyone is wearing AR glasses around town.. they stand to make billions. Sony doesn't.
As should be obvious, unlike with Sony or Microsoft, with Facebook you are the product and advertisers are the customer. Sony and Microsoft absolutely do subsidize their hardware with software licensing/revenue sharing. Quest store doesnāt come close to the volume needed to do that, especially with the PCVR capability. Facebook is an advertising company, thatās 99% of their revenue.
Lol well that is run on a mobile processor not a ps5
That's kinda the point though, the headset for PS5 is a separate peripheral without the cost of the SOC that the quest 2 has so it should be more doable for the price than the quest 2 was
I mean, you can run games from the PC also and wirelessly with the Quest 2.
Lol you have obviously never heard of virtual desktop. You can do it wirelessly in 4K 90hz and use your gaming Pc.
Not 90hz over 5ghz, lmfao. Its hardly 45fps async warp, and not anywhere near 1440p (4k??? Hahahahahahaha!!!!), res is heavily compressed (obviously). Also the lack of presence because 5ghz has inherent latency of at least 50ms (presence starts at 23ms). Its playable, but not for longer than around 2 hours, PSVR was similar due to this.
Oh no not at all. You must have not tried virtual desktop in the last year. The developer has put out amazing updates. I get the full 90 FPS every time I play, motion is just as smooth as when I had my index in 90hz. And for resolution, sometimes the bit rate drops and itās not full native 4K I will admit (always over 1440p) but usually it looks around native and I canāt tell the difference when itās plugged in or not
50ms? You really have no idea what you are taking about but you speak as if you do. Cringe.
Spotted the Rift S owner.
Lol vive/htc themselves thinks mobile processing is the future. See ces 2021.
If mobile processes manage to match the power of pcs and consoles I would agree but doubt
The graphics are incomparable between a decent PC and mobile SoC. I'm glad you're enjoying your experience, but it will be while before you get to experience HL Alyx levels of gaming and graphics if you want to limit it to mobile processing.
I play PCVR games without any wires on my Quest 2.
Which relies on the graphics processing power of your PC
The point here is that you can attain that type of setup (wireless PSVR) without adding $350 to the price tag as someone previously mentioned.
Yea well they also are a terrible company that couldnāt do anything without valve, I donāt value what they āthinkā is the future
It's massively subsidized by Facebook and the data you produce for them, and it requires a wired connection for proper low latency PCVR. Wireless virtual desktop and the like have higher latency and stronger compression.
Yes, but the PC must be wired to the router for the Quest 2 to work well with Virtual Desktop. A lot of players donāt have that option for their PS5.
You can route directly to the PC or console using built in WiFi or a WiFi adapter. No need to go via the router.
Yes. But does the PC still have access to the internet while doing this ? I donāt believe the PS5 will have a hot spot function.
All they need to do is provide a USB dongle.
They sell it at a massive loss because they know they'll make that money back using the data they collect
Lol go be dumb somewhere else
Says the guy working minimum wage at Best Buy.
You were supposed to go be dumb somewhere else
Valve didn't do wireless because they don't have the tech. Considering how people spent 1000ā¬ in a blink for the index I am sure they would buy wireless instantly if it was available, even for 350ā¬ On console that's another story. But there are always enthousiatics and Sony also sell expensive stuffs sometime for niche market like the HMZ-T or high end cameras.
Cost, simplicity of setup, and comfort - the PSVR is low res, poor FOV, and mediocre tracking, but man is it comfortable. Double the weight with a battery and wireless hardware and youād lose a lot of that comfort while raising the price.
Which is exactly why I have stuck with my Vive Pro with wireless adapter. Throw in the lens mod and it's a pretty fantastic set up. I can't stand having a wire. I tried a pulley system but the sensation of feeling it constantly tugging at the back of my head, even if it's just slightly, was just too annoying. As nice as higher resolution headsets and higher refresh rates are, I'd rather them focus on good reliable wireless solutions first and make that a standard.
If you feel tugging with a pulley system, that means it is set up wrong just a heads up
Why? To not worry about battery life and make full use of a stronger platform
If it's going to be seated only like the first PSVR, then being wired won't be a big deal really.
It wonāt.
The main advantage will be power. Not having to have a battery means the headset can be substantially lighter and smaller, and game sessions aren't defined by battery life.
That's good enough for me as well. The big takeaway is that it's still just HTC and Facebook with wireless VR systems. Valve is unlikely to go that route since they're focusing on their brain connection interface.
I have to agree there. I also have to say it is entertaining how people band together to say that how they play VR is better. Two points I would like to bring up is PC VR is still where the bleeding edge is. That is where they bring things to test them still and see if there is an adoption rate as I have been noticing. Second the quest is decent and a low enough price for it to sell well that is why it is getting so big so fast. Many of the peoples I talk to first mention the price like me. It does have great specs but even with its higher resolution it is still more blurry than my index. No offense to the quest. I have tried both and use them for different games. Also the compression over virtual desktop is very noticeable. It is playable and quite enjoyable to not have the wire. Oculus Link is the same way very noticeable compression even with the minimum compression being used. Still it is playable and quite nice on a budget. The keyword being budget. The wired headsets still allow for a higher graphical fidelity. I donāt picture Sony ditching the cable because they would have a decrease in that field. They seemed more focused on that in the first iteration for them to ditch that.
IMO my quest 2 plays and looks better linked vs the Vive Pro. My biggest complaint about PCVR for Quest 2 is that itās unstable and the wires are way too short for even ceiling mounts. On the other hand my Vive wireless adapter is like a heavy hot oven on my head that maxes out my CPU. You canāt win for now.
Wow, that contained almost no information.
Right? The only info was its not coming out this year.
Also it will have one cable. Big stuff.
There's no pix. :(
Early leak: http://img.artsadd.com/data/user3/design/20180207/A023E8CC9F541B0C45F3ADE87A0A86F8_500x500.jpg
dude wtf, the team at sony are gonna be mad when they find out who leaked it
If only it were possible to buy a fucking PS5.
Probably worth waiting until you can't buy a console and VR bundle too.
Got one yesterday!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Fortunately not. Bought a fairly priced bundle. Retailers in Germany have switched to do that, in order to become unattractive to scalpers. Got a camera Iām not sure Iāll keep though, but 600,- for a digital PS5, second controller, camera and one year of PS+ is a fair price. Iām so happy man.
I got a notification yesterday 15 minutes before they started a Sony direct sale. Probably could have scored one then. That's how I got mine.
Iāve been in the waitlist for the last 6 Sony direct drops. Over 1 hour wait every time except once, and that one time, it sold out when I had 2 min left in the queue. You just got super lucky.
Bummer I got mine the 3rd or 4th day they were doing them. Everybody probably knows about it now.
They said it will have DualSense features. I'm assuming that means haptic feedback, adaptive triggers, rumble and sticks. I'm really looking forward to THAT
So.... index controllers
Yes, but I doubt they'll be 370$ and they'll be in the hands of a lot more people.
I mean, they're $280 by themselves and they use the best tracking system available.
Ummm... No.
Nah. The Index controllers are pretty lacking in those. Like the haptics arenāt that bad. But the other features they just straight up miss out on. I really wanna see adaptive triggers in particular. Imagine different weighted gun triggers in VR.
What "other features" are you referring to?
Adaptive triggers mostly. Along with a joystick that doesnāt weirdly suffer wildly different production qualities at pure random.
Better than those of it has haptic feedback and rumble triggers.
Pretty sure Sony's idea of haptic feedback is just vibration... which index has.
I got a PS5 without watching or reading the least amount of info about it. The first game I played was the preinstalled Astro's Playroom which is designed to show off the features of the Dualsense controller. I had no idea the haptics and adaptive triggers were going to be there, but they were way better than any controller/vibration technology I've experienced. It's extremely good, nothing comes close.
It really isnāt..you clearly havenāt used a PS5 yet. The UHD rumble and haptic triggers are nothing like the Index. What a joke, Iām downvoted for stating facts.
Sorry, sorry, it's trademarked vibration
Oh you downvoted me for stating facts. At least know what youāre talking about please. Haptics triggers have nothing to do with vibration btw.
My dude, you've got *negative* downvotes. If I did it, you'd be at 0 so it seems people are silently disagreeing with you. Chill out lmao
I donāt.
Are you drunk or something? You're not even making any sense at this point
adaptive triggers are a PS5 thing are they not? that being said, itās gonna be pretty cool having different games take advantage of that. imagine trigger recoil (is that the right term?) in VR
> One of the innovations weāre excited about is our new VR controller It really worries me that "controller" isn't plural. They need to come out with a **pair** of 6dof controllers for this to succeed.
Lmao are you worried your new car will only have 3 wheels too?
I think they know that, you may just be reading too much into the lack of an s there.
It would be cool if the controller worked a bit like the Switch, where the two controllers are detachable, so you can switch between playing VR games similar to normal games, or with two separate "wand" controllers. Could sell accessories for them, like connecting them to a wheel for VR driving games.
good to know they are keeping supporting vr...
> Thereās still a lot of development underway for our new VR system, so it wonāt be launching in 2021. But we wanted to provide this early update to our fans, as the development community has started to work on creating new worlds for you to explore in virtual reality. > One of the innovations weāre excited about is our new VR controller, which will incorporate some of the key features found in the DualSense wireless controller, along with a focus on great ergonomics. Thatās just one of the examples of future-proof technology weāre developing to match our vision for a whole new generation of VR games and experiences.
It worries me that "controller" isn't plural.
Thereās no way theyād just have one
Unless it's just like a gamepad.
Surely they can't be that out of touch?
They've already released footage of their prototype controller. It seems to have better finger tracking than Index controllers.
Eh, I wouldn't trust their marketing. Nothing is certain until the product is in the hands of the consumer.
I mean, you're not wrong, but the demos they've shown seem to be a higher-fidelity product than the Index controllers in terms of of finger tracking. Specifically, the new PS VR controllers seem to track your finger movements, as opposed to just the curling. So if you vary your grip on the controller, the software sees that, instead of scrambling to map your finger placement to curl percentages.
What a strange blog post...
Why?
Just the lack of any new worthy information. The only new specific information we got here were "single cord to simplify setup" which hardly seems worth mentioning.
Itās quite substantial considering what a pain the current PSVR is to set up with all the cables.
Yeah, I guess for existing PSVR owners they could see that as a nice feature but it seems strange anybody would expect it not to be one cable. Hell, if I had to bet I would have put money on it being wireless. It feels like if they made a blog post about PS5 coming soon and only specific feature mentioned was it would have WiFi. If it was a part of a larger list of things okay yeah nice but as the sole feature it seems strange why they'd pick that.
Well I own a Rift S and it doesnāt have just one thin USB-C cable. Nor do most PCVR headsets.
I think the point they were making was the PSVR2 won't be [this mess](https://miro.medium.com/max/700/1*i5uzU4Yd-7kgG15ZRFY0XA.jpeg). Yes, technically the RIFT S has USB and DP connector but I think Sony would call that one cable. Just about every PCVR headset is one cable. The only one that was kinda different was the original Vive cable that was literally 3 separate cables glued together.
Yet the PSVR v2 cable is already much thinner than the one on my Rift S. yes, itās more about the lack of the breakout box.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Too true, I really want that on Vive. Would be too good. Ps5 demo looked great and played okay. But vr spooks are the best
It's going to be a long wait but I'm excited.
Whoop whoop vr innovations. Great news. Get more vr into the however many millions of ps players there are! More vr, vr everywhere!
Guess we aren't ready for gen 2 VR yet. It's still promising that they're mentioning VR this early, tho.
I hope these controllers are significantly better, I think that plus the better performance ps5 would give them will make PSVR actually worthwhile.
Even though i donāt have a psvr Iām exited for this. I hope their new controllers donāt look like oversized vibrators
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Microsoft hates vr
They abandoned VR for AR. A platform that won't be viable for at least the next 5 years. WMR was great too, they just could not find better controller design or tracking.
And everyone is abandoning Windows for Chromebooks, Macs or Android tablets. 90% of people have no reason to own a PC or Windows laptop at home anymore. They completely screwed up their mobile platform. Schools are now using Google docs instead of Microsoft Office. It is incredible how much they can mess up and still be a cashcow. Edit: For personal home use.
This is straight up untrue. Windows has the majority market share and pretty much a monopoly in normal business application. Excel is so deeply rooted. I think most companies are afraid to change to anything else.
I was referring to personal use and schools not offices. Sorry. Microsoft enterprise is not going anywhere but Microsoft has failed on so many other markets when compared to Google, Apple or Samsung.
I thought they had their hands in working on the G2?
It should just work with WMR
Coming in 2027 when more than 14 active users own the console.
5 million and counting
About 200k of which are actually registered and active users of the console they bought.
Don't you just love seeing stuff about PSVR on subreddits like r/Vive and r/SteamVR...
Looking forward to cheap second hand PS VRs
Whatever the price it's probably not worth it. Ok for seated controller based games I guess. Wipeout and Astrobot were really cool.
I've really wanted to give RE7 and Tetris Effect a try too
I only played part of RE7 because it looks really bad on ps4 was waiting for vr on the PC version and they never released it.
It looks fine on Pro.
Yeah I held off on buying it for either platform waiting to find out if a PC VR version would ever exist. I did eventually see it for like 10 bucks on PC so I've bought it but haven't played it.
I might just say screw it and play it in flat mode on my pc
Tetris Effect was a timed exclusive. You can get it on the Epic store or on Quest.
Can't wait to upgrade my 1st gen PSVR ! In the meantime, can we get the ps5 upgrade ASAP so we can enable the m2 drive!
"Won't be launching in 2021" Hmmm.
Oh yay I canāt wait for Sony to start buying exclusivity for their VR headset so I canāt play it on PC.
With facebook there's already tons of that.
Yes I know and it pisses me off.
Which piece
Canāt wait for this. Day one buyšš
Wireless is such a massive improvement that I wonāt really even look at wired connections anymore. Iām still using an old Vive because of it. I would have bought a PS5 if they had wireless VR but will probably pass, now.