Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst ... 2
Results 26 to 35 of 35
  1. #26
    Dedicated Member
    Sajuuk Khar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    26
    Posts
    1,461
    Rep Power
    74
    Points
    9,768 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sufi View Post
    i don't think i can really take a 720p game lol. i'd prefer at least 900p...maybe they can do 2x 1080p in indie games...
    I get where your coming from. But the resolution needed for the small screens inside the VR head sets may not have to be over 720p to produce a good quality image. It links into the argument of what resolution you need for a TV of a certain size compared to how far you sit from said TV.

    Have a look at this quick review of sony's head mounted display. He talks and compares it with oculus rift and notes that you cant see the pixel grid and has a much improved experience compared to OR. 1080p would probably result in a better image, but there might be limited returns when dealing with such small screens that close to the eye.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy82wFAIZIE

    Personally I want one of those,

    A) For the kinda perfect 3 it should be able to do
    and
    B) so can totally geek out with a Ghost in the Shell experience :P

    Doing some research while typing this, it appears sony's head mounted display looks better because each eye is getting a 720p image, while on the oculus there is a single large screen in the head piece which shows the left and right eye cutting the resolution per eye almost in half.


    Of course all of this is hypothetical and they could go 1080p, 720p or not even release anything at all.


    Edit: Also oculus plans to have a 1080p display in their consumer model, which when divided for each eye would equal bit more than 960x540 per eye. Less than whats in sonys head mounted display. I say a little bit more because of the way oculus divides the screen there is some overlap in the middle to mimic real world vision.
    Last edited by Sajuuk Khar; 03-14-2014 at 17:39.

  2. #27
    Forum Overseer
    Omar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Addison, TX.
    Age
    32
    Posts
    32,270
    Rep Power
    197
    Points
    130,102 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Sajuuk Khar View Post
    I get where your coming from. But the resolution needed for the small screens inside the VR head sets may not have to be over 720p to produce a good quality image. It links into the argument of what resolution you need for a TV of a certain size compared to how far you sit from said TV.

    Have a look at this quick review of sony's head mounted display. He talks and compares it with oculus rift and notes that you cant see the pixel grid and has a much improved experience compared to OR. 1080p would probably result in a better image, but there might be limited returns when dealing with such small screens that close to the eye.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy82wFAIZIE

    Personally I want one of those,

    A) For the kinda perfect 3 it should be able to do
    and
    B) so can totally geek out with a Ghost in the Shell experience :P

    Doing some research while typing this, it appears sony's head mounted display looks better because each eye is getting a 720p image, while on the oculus there is a single large screen in the head piece which shows the left and right eye cutting the resolution per eye almost in half.


    Of course all of this is hypothetical and they could go 1080p, 720p or not even release anything at all.
    oh i totally get the whole distance thing. i know you can have a tiny screen and if close enough to your eye, it can give you the perception of watching a big screen 60".

    my problem is...because it will project the image as if it were on a big screen...i'd think we would still run into the resolution issue...where it may be blurry.

    though i would have to try it first...maybe it isn't not a problem...

    i keep thinking though that this may end up being more popular with smaller games, indie etc. that's the problem with these exotic techs (Kinect/Move/Eyetoy). unless it is supported in every single game...what's the point?

  3. #28
    Counting Mod
    PS4freak's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    PSN ID
    lsutigers19
    Age
    27
    Posts
    13,954
    Rep Power
    146
    Points
    90,992 (190,439 Banked)
    Items Final Fantasy XIIIFinal Fantasy XCall of Duty: Black OPSDragon Ball ZPS3 SlimGoogle Chrome
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    This is very cool and something that people gave beenwaiting on for a long time but I have a feeling pricing is going to be an issue.




    Currently Playing: ​Skyrim, Far Cry 4
    Currently Waiting For: ​​ The Order:1886

  4. #29
    Dedicated Member
    Sajuuk Khar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    26
    Posts
    1,461
    Rep Power
    74
    Points
    9,768 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sufi View Post
    oh i totally get the whole distance thing. i know you can have a tiny screen and if close enough to your eye, it can give you the perception of watching a big screen 60".

    my problem is...because it will project the image as if it were on a big screen...i'd think we would still run into the resolution issue...where it may be blurry.

    though i would have to try it first...maybe it isn't not a problem...

    i keep thinking though that this may end up being more popular with smaller games, indie etc. that's the problem with these exotic techs (Kinect/Move/Eyetoy). unless it is supported in every single game...what's the point?
    Oh yeah it totally needs to much wider testing and reviews. And developer backing needs to be there. But that could depend on how its implemented. At the very basic level it will work as a highly immersive display to use instead of a TV with accurate 3d built in. The other functions like motion sensing and what not will be very game and developer specific. Thinking about it, first person games are the main draw card ( My god, mirrors edge with VR head set, hello motion sickness :P). 3rd person and other games wouldn't need as highly tuned settings as your point of view is more an actual camera rather than some ones point of view.

    Again though, lets see if anything actually gets announced :P

  5. #30
    Forum Overseer
    Omar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Addison, TX.
    Age
    32
    Posts
    32,270
    Rep Power
    197
    Points
    130,102 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Sajuuk Khar View Post
    Oh yeah it totally needs to much wider testing and reviews. And developer backing needs to be there. But that could depend on how its implemented. At the very basic level it will work as a highly immersive display to use instead of a TV with accurate 3d built in. The other functions like motion sensing and what not will be very game and developer specific. Thinking about it, first person games are the main draw card ( My god, mirrors edge with VR head set, hello motion sickness :P). 3rd person and other games wouldn't need as highly tuned settings as your point of view is more an actual camera rather than some ones point of view.

    Again though, lets see if anything actually gets announced :P
    lol well let's assume it gets announced. i like that it will have more uses than just gaming stuff...if i can use it for movies...wow. that right there is value-added.

    second, i totally get your point, i would not want it for all games. but you're saying that it wouldn't be difficult to implement in shooters in general? if so, that would be nice. because i don't care for a lot of features, just something i can be immersed in.

    or just as a TV too...so if i put this on, i don't need a TV? big deal if true.

  6. #31
    Dedicated Member
    sneezymarble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,049
    Rep Power
    56
    Points
    4,365 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sajuuk Khar View Post
    I get where your coming from. But the resolution needed for the small screens inside the VR head sets may not have to be over 720p to produce a good quality image. It links into the argument of what resolution you need for a TV of a certain size compared to how far you sit from said TV.

    Have a look at this quick review of sony's head mounted display. He talks and compares it with oculus rift and notes that you cant see the pixel grid and has a much improved experience compared to OR. 1080p would probably result in a better image, but there might be limited returns when dealing with such small screens that close to the eye.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy82wFAIZIE

    Personally I want one of those,

    A) For the kinda perfect 3 it should be able to do
    and
    B) so can totally geek out with a Ghost in the Shell experience :P

    Doing some research while typing this, it appears sony's head mounted display looks better because each eye is getting a 720p image, while on the oculus there is a single large screen in the head piece which shows the left and right eye cutting the resolution per eye almost in half.


    Of course all of this is hypothetical and they could go 1080p, 720p or not even release anything at all.


    Edit: Also oculus plans to have a 1080p display in their consumer model, which when divided for each eye would equal bit more than 960x540 per eye. Less than whats in sonys head mounted display. I say a little bit more because of the way oculus divides the screen there is some overlap in the middle to mimic real world vision.
    Sony's head mounted display is probably sugestive of what to expect from Sony's VR headset. They have most of the components already and 720p per eye puts the total pixel count at a little under a single 1080p screen, which is probably doable at 60fps with some quality sacrifices on the PS4. Of course, in the coming years, the sacrifices needed to maintain 60fps will go up, but that's just the way things go. It'll be interesting to see how developers handle VR on the PS4 in the years to come. For example, will they keep VR and non-VR experiences uniform in terms of quality? Or will they create two quality settings, one that has increased quality but drops below 60fps, and one that maintains 60fps to sacrifice quality and preserve the VR experience?

    Regarding the Rift, I just read something today that stated that Palmer said that the consumer OR will be greater than 1080p, but I can't seem to find it now. I really hope that's true.
    i7 4770 | EVGA GTX 780 ti SC ACX | 32GB
    i7 3770 |
    EVGA GTX 780 ti SC ACX | 16GB

  7. #32
    Superior Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    793
    Rep Power
    67
    Points
    5,855 (0 Banked)
    What if you could also use your VR headsets so you didn't need the TV and your wife could watch TV...or let's say that cool little Vita TV could stream it as well. I think there are plenty of options...and I mostly think this thing will be more a personal viewer and make things a little more emersive...I don't really see total VR but the controllers do have that light bar for a reason....that said its probably a secondary market for developers but if the AAA games make use of it and a couple exclusive games for it here and there...thats enough for me....imagine the driving games and FPS would lend themselves ok....especially with the sharpshooter...I liked it last gen but I hated trying to look left and right and up and down....if that could be done by the headset instead and walking by the controller...win for me. Whatever it turns out to be I'm all in. If it's cheaper than the price of the PS4 I'm going to buy it.

  8. #33
    Master Guru
    TDbank24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Age
    29
    Posts
    6,875
    Rep Power
    69
    Points
    39,172 (0 Banked)
    I think Sony's VR tech is going to be awesome. Time will tell.


  9. #34
    Dedicated Member
    Sajuuk Khar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    26
    Posts
    1,461
    Rep Power
    74
    Points
    9,768 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sufi View Post
    oh i totally get the whole distance thing. i know you can have a tiny screen and if close enough to your eye, it can give you the perception of watching a big screen 60".

    my problem is...because it will project the image as if it were on a big screen...i'd think we would still run into the resolution issue...where it may be blurry.

    though i would have to try it first...maybe it isn't not a problem...

    i keep thinking though that this may end up being more popular with smaller games, indie etc. that's the problem with these exotic techs (Kinect/Move/Eyetoy). unless it is supported in every single game...what's the point?
    So looks like Sony went with a similar technique as the Oculus is using. While might not look as good as dual 720 screens, should bring the cost down considerably. They are potentially using the same panels that their phones are using. Also should mean less of a strain to actually run the games which is a nice bonus.

  10. Likes Omar likes this post
  11. #35
    Valar Morghulis
    Serinous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    PSN ID
    SerinousTSE
    Posts
    10,878
    Rep Power
    96
    Points
    21,541 (0 Banked)
    Items PS3 FatVitaPS3 Slim
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    I'm very excited about this, however, I want to see some contents and price.




Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
vBCredits II Deluxe v2.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2010-2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.