KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
Sony has been working on PlayStation VR (formerly Project Morpheus) since 2013. We already knew that the company had the final specification in mind, it was just waiting for developers to build a solid library of launch titles. Now, Sony has shared that final specification with the world, with a release date for the headset pinned for some time in the first half of 2016.
The PlayStationVR headset will use a 5.7-inch OLED display with a 1080p resolution, which isn't great for pixel density at close range, but the PS4 does have limited hardware capabilities. The screen itself will run at a 120Hz refresh rate and offer low latency under 18ms.
[yframe url='http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMq8gQkljMw']
There will be positional tracking with 9 LEDs and 360 degree head-tracking, along with 3D audio. Users will also have a 100-degree field of view, with an accelerometer and gyroscope for motion sensing. Basically, it will include everything you need for a virtual reality experience. Right now, Sony has plenty of developers working on VR projects for launch, though we still don't know exactly when that is or what the launch line up will look like. However, it seems that Sony is in no rush with this, which is good, after all, the last thing VR needs is a high-profile failure.
KitGuru Says: Many are still sceptical as to how well VR will run on a PS4 and I don't blame them. However, those who have tried PlayStationVR already have come away with very positive impressions, so I'd keep an open mind. Are you planning on jumping in to VR in 2016? I'm looking forward to grabbing an Oculus myself.
This thing is awesome. Got to try it out at FanExpo in Toronto. It takes some time to get used too but it’s a lot of fun
120 Hz to play games at 30 FPS?
Need 120hz for the 3d, So it’s more like 60hz each eye, But as we all know consoles are lucky if they even hit 30fps at 1080p
they’ll reach 120fps….the games will just look like the original Virtua Fighter or the original Tekken haha
Low resolution?
As stated in the article 1080p is really low up close. It doesn’t sound bad until you actually put it on. I’d say to get a proper immersive VR experience 4k would be required. 1080p is just too fuzzy
Have you used any of the current VR headsets?
No this is the only one I got to try, didn’t have time for the Oculus sadly…
it does not look fuzzy at all. It looks pixelated. You see large dots.
Yeah that’s what I mean. It’s not very immersive
The 120hz has nothing to do with 3D, the fact that each eye gets a slightly different image makes it 3D, it could be running at 1hz and still be 3D. The 120hz is for smooth motion, you need a high framerate for VR. It is true that most of the games will only run at 60fps, but Sony have some very nice tech that fills in the gaps and makes it look like 120fps.
yes, the 120hz has a lot to do with 3d. its generally 2x 60hz. one 60hz screen for the left and one 60hz screen for the right eye but the hardware behind the screens has to work on 120hz to support both. and no, its not at all for VR and smooth motion. if the playstation gives only 30fps the screen VR or not, will not change anything on the motion. its to dont see the flashing of the screen.
18ms. seriously? haha, ok, i dont want it 🙂 its like a TV 🙁
I don’t think you understand how it works 😛 Monitors have multiple things when it comes to this.
There’s response time, thats the 1-5ms you see when looking at TN panels, normally a bit higher for IPS. Then you have absolute input lag, which even the best gaming monitors like the Asus Rog Swift, sit around 23ms. The “low latency” is almost 100% likely to be referring to the absolute input lag, which having under 18 is actually very good.
I mean it’s Ps4 vr, it wont be very good, but the technology in the screen is perfectly fine aside from just being 1080p so don’t be hating on that 😛
Except, Playstation VR doesn’t work like that.
The things you explained are totally true for 3D TV, where images for the left and right eyes are being switched alternatively on the screen (making 60fps per eye needing 120hz).
But despite the fact Playstation VR (like that Occulus Rift or HTC Vive) only use 1 screen to, the lenses only let your eyes see one half of it (left or right half). When the screen is running at 60Hz, both eyes see 60 fps.
The hardware (PS4 here) still have to compute 2 images from a slightly different point of view “at the same times” (and not alternatively like before), but at a resolution only half 1080p for each.
People who played Driveclub VR at Paris Games Week (last week) said the game was clearly downgraded visually, but still beautiful.
But frankly, I don’t see VR being used for anithing else than casual/party games on PS4. It’s a different thing on PC, a platform with a broader “simulation” audience (cars, plane, spaceship, etc.) which is better suited for VR.
As explained by @Sch@dows, the 120hz has nothing to do with the 3D, as this is different to the traditional 3D you’re thinking about. Also the high refresh rate has everything to do with VR. As you said, yes it’s partly to avoid seeing the flickering of the screen, which in VR headsets, with your eyes so close to the screen is more noticable, but it is also to make the motion as smooth as possible so that the movement and head tracking in the game can be as fast and close to real life as possible. If the game runs at 30fps then timewarp and Playstation’s reprojection tech will kick in to keep the head tracking looking like it’s still running at 120fps, obviously at 30fps this will make some moving objects look pretty jumpy, but that’s why iirc most games will be targeting to run at 60fps and no lower. Reprojection supposedly works very well from 60fps to 120fps.
erm, my benq has 2ms response time and 10ms latency… 23ms are toshiba TV-s. actually i think 1080p is far smaller problem. true you will watch it from a close up but the size of the screen is what? like 1/5 of a normal monitor or even smaller. it means its pixels are 1/5 of a 1080p desktop monitor, it should be just fine for a vr. (dont even mention that its 2x 1080p for our eyes) the problem is rather the lens tech behind
Why is it 60hz each eye? It’s a single display, that means the display is 120hz. Not 60hz
i think you need to rethink that. Party games are very poorly suited for a VR headset. The obvious console application are for FPS, survival horror, western style RPGs, and anything that involves driving or flying a vehicle.
Question I need to ask. Is this vr set one screen or 2 screens, one screen for each eye? When watching 3d movies or playing 3d games. Because my left eye is stronger than my right I can see double image though the glasses, ive had both active and passive 3d and happens on both. For instance if im playing a 3d 3Rd person adventure. Everything in the world is fine but the character and/or the on screen menu, these are doubled. I can mess around with the settings to correct the image on the character/menu but this alters the rest of the image in the background to be seen doubled. If the VR has 2 screens will this be a issue for me?
Unfortunately, FPS doesn’t really cut it (at least for me).
I’ve tried, and frankly that’s not the kind of immersion you might expect, probably because contrary to simulations (where you’re supposed to be still while driving something), here you’re suppose to move “yourself” in the game. It was awkward, and if this wasn’t enough it also pose the problem of aiming.
Aiming with the head was not really intuitive, and aiming with the gamepad (hence moving the camera with it) did what little immersion was left. One PS move might help there (can’t have 2 if you need to move your avatar) but the latency was clearly not going to make FPS a good experience.
I didn’t only said party game (we’ve already seen some demo of asymetrical party games) but also casual. Roller Coster style (I mean “games” which aren’t games where you’re mostly a spectator with very limited interaction), arcade rail shooters, and stuff like that will surely make a better impression.
On my side, while I don’t plan to buy Playstation VR, I will surely buy HTC Vive or something alike on PC, because the experience I had with Occulus Rift was fantastic on racing sims (project cars), and space battle (elite dangerous).
In my opinion (could be wrong of course), VR is the same kind of “revolution” to gaming as was “tactile”. Some games will greatly benefit from it, with even new genre being born, but it won’t be of use for most of the other game type.
While I don’t really understand how is that possible, it shouldn’t be a problem here.
Playstation VR, like Occulus Rift and HTC Vive use only one screen, but make it physically impossible to see more than half of the screen with one eye (left eye=left part of the screen, and vice versa), unless your eye sees through walls (which might come handy for other purpose d(^_~ )
Sony HMD (head mounted display) helmets have 2 separate screens, but the technology is way more expensive, and expect for Sony’s Prototype-SR shown at TGS a couple of years ago (which also throw augmented reality into the mix), don’t have headtracking nor gyroscope features (it is basically just for watching movie in what seems to the spectator it’s own private theater).