Sony Developing Games Using VR Tech

[exfileme]

Could Sony's virtual reality tech be heading to the PlayStation 4?

Sony Developing Games Using VR Tech : Read more

 

[Kaiser_25]

im still sceptical if 'VR' is going to be a viable gaming solution, i think it is still many years away from being worth a damn. I think this and the next few will just be Virtual Boy, just with better graphics. IMHO ofcourse..

 

[alhanelem]

i swear to god... if this isnt some optional extra for the ps4 like the eye-toy or PlayStation move im just going to stick to the ps3 till it dies just like i did with my ps2 when the ps3 came out

 

[JOSHSKORN]

I think 'VR' will be much bigger than 3D. This sounds cool. I wonder what sort of competition Microsoft has cooked up for the next XBOX.

 

[DSpider]

Isn't having your eyeballs so close to an LCD a health hazard ? Not like going blind but gradually losing sight over time.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]DSpider[/nom]Isn't having your eyeballs so close to an LCD a health hazard ? Not like going blind but gradually losing sight over time.[/citation]

not exactly. the way these are made and calibrated is so its like a 30-60 inch screen is at the perfect viewing distance. and with 2 screens there is VERY little fatiguing on the eyes.

i spent an hour in REALLY old version of these that used crts, either i have the eyes of a god when it comes to fatigue, or they are just awesome in regards to eye strain.

[citation][nom]alhanelem[/nom]i swear to god... if this isnt some optional extra for the ps4 like the eye-toy or PlayStation move im just going to stick to the ps3 till it dies just like i did with my ps2 when the ps3 came out[/citation]

i hope to god its mandatory.

if vr comes out with decent head sets. and i mean something like 720p per eye good, or even 1080p, and they can track head movement and simple gestures, such as moving head left right up down and tilting it a bit to see around a corner.

i mean dont get me wrong, i want a controller and i want to sit down, but simple things like that? it would enhance the game.

look, when you have full immersion like a headset, you have to realize that you genuinely feel like you are there. such as on a rollercaster (where i spent much of my time in vr), or in a car racing. can you imagine burnout in vr... hell racing games, a genre which was dead to me for years, would be a genre that i would have to get into again.

 

[Zeh]

[citation][nom]JOSHSKORN[/nom]I think 'VR' will be much bigger than 3D. This sounds cool. I wonder what sort of competition Microsoft has cooked up for the next XBOX.[/citation]

Why not 3D VR?

Anyways, most moms out there wouldn't let their young kids play with that thing, they know kids would eventually end up destroying the house if they couldn't see anything. Hell even being able to see they already do!

 

[nebun]

VR tech is dead....it's not the 1970s.....the dead gear is very heavy....especially when you have it on your head for extended periods of time

 

[jcb82]

Dunno, anytime i hear about VR tech, I think of the veritable dud that was Nintendo's Virtual Boy. Anyways, I'm sure its been improved by leaps and bounds since then but I just think: if they haven't been able to perfect glasses-less 3D tech, what makes them think that they can do 3D VR?

I just hope that they keep an option open for regular viewing because I'm not going to buy 3d tv let alone some other expensive gizmo to make my games more immersive.

 

[drwho1]

I'm not interested on this VR or 3DVR technology. I prefer to have a normal control on my hands to play my games, I don't own a "move" either nor care about it.

 

[cknobman]

Just like most 3D today if I have to wear some dumb@ss equipment on my head to experience it I WILL NOT BUY IT.

 

[palladin9479]

HMD (Head Mounted Displays) are probably the absolute best way to recreate depth with stereoscopic vision. The developer knows the exact distance between the eyeballs and can calibrate the depth separate accordingly. This leads to extremely realistic vision. Unfortunately it's expensive, and thus usually reserved for training simulators. The US Military makes use of this technology extensively for training pilots. It's even experimenting using it for combat forces in a simulated combat system.

3D effects are the future guys, unless you've missed the message everyone is out there trying to outdo each other. The idea's old, but it wasn't until recently that the technology has been available to recreate stereoscopic vision with high quality.

 

[Guest]

Alright, time for a little common sense here.
Zeh, VR is 3D, from the first VR enviroments in the 70-80s they had sterio scopic 3D.
jcb82, classes-less 3D is not here because it is very difficult to pull off. Just take a look at 3D TVs, or the 3DS; It is crap, hard to look at, and is only good for one person at a time. The problem is 3D with glasses is the fact that you loose contrast due to the filtering on the glasses. The other nice thing is that having 2 personal screens lets you adjust your own depth of field to be natural to you (no more headaches or things looking super deep or shallow).
DSpider, no it will not damage your eyes, and yes, slowing loosing your vision would be considered going blind. The reason that sitting 6-8" from your TV is hazerdous is because the thing is cranked up to 200-600cd/m2, it is meant to be viewed in a room with ambient light so that there is less contrast on the eye (causing eye strain) and designed to be viewed several feet away. This is why high quality projectors are under 1000 lumens, they are made for controled environments where less light is required. These headsets are a controled enviornment with screens that will only put out ~50cd/m2, which is plenty bright for their application.

I dobut Microsoft or Nintendo will compete with this tech any time soon. Nintendo is all about cheap social fun, where it is just as much about getting together with friends as it is playing a game. Microsoft seems to have taken more of an anti-interface aproach, leaning towards a lack of devices rather than something as intrusive as a headset. Granted, if it takes off, then they will be on it like a fly on poo.
I dobut this will be the default interface for the PS3 as the casuial gamer, and even some hard core ones, would be put off by wearing something. However, I think it is a next logical step for the PS. Sony has been about the personal expierence (which is the atraction for eletist bastards like myself). It is not about the social expierence, it is about putting yourself into a game or a story. That is why they have traditionally been the RPG console of choice (imagine skyrim in an imersive enviornment!). But like I said, this does not lend itself to some, or even most, games, just the epic games of the FPS and RPG relms.

 

[vistaofdoom]

[citation][nom]jcb82[/nom]Dunno, anytime i hear about VR tech, I think of the veritable dud that was Nintendo's Virtual Boy. Anyways, I'm sure its been improved by leaps and bounds since then but I just think: if they haven't been able to perfect glasses-less 3D tech, what makes them think that they can do 3D VR? I just hope that they keep an option open for regular viewing because I'm not going to buy 3d tv let alone some other expensive gizmo to make my games more immersive.[/citation]

What does eyeless 3D got to do with 3d vr using 2 different displays for 2 eyes... see a resemblance... 1 eye per 1 display... need a map?

 

[vistaofdoom]

-eye + glass

 

[eddieroolz]

That'll be quite cool, in fact.

 

[thillntn]

enjoy it till the warranty runs out, then it will disable itself lol.

 

[mauller07]

But did you know that they used 3D imaging during world war 2 for use in bombing runs, to identify distinguishing features of the terrain that are unnatural by creating height maps.

 

[Guest]

i thought VR gave way to AR (augmented reality) which has the bonus of inducing less fatigue and motion sickness in it's users

granted they not mange to make a decent enough HMD for AR yet but that should not be so hard with a bit of real effort

 

[bustapr]

my glasses wont approve