Sony Gives First Details on Next-gen PSVR2 Headset for PS5 (techcrunch.com) 41
Sony has announced some basic information about its much-anticipated next-generation VR hardware for the PS5, which it calls -- predictably -- PSVR2. Little was revealed about the device beyond its basic specs but it did confirm some features gamers will care about. From a report: The original PSVR was a competent, relatively affordable, easy to use device but fairly limited in terms of hardware: resolution, field of view and such. So Sony's announcement that the new one will be considerably more advanced will be very welcome. The PSVR2 was confirmed by Sony to have 4K HDR imagery, 2000x2040 per eye, and the field of view will also be wider than the original hardware at 110 degrees. A blog post that appeared after the live announcement confirmed rumors that it uses OLED and will have a 90-120Hz refresh rate. It will however feature eye-tracking and foveated rendering, must-haves these days. Eye-tracking for obvious gameplay and other reasons, and foveated rendering so that the notoriously resource-hungry VR rendering process can focus its cycles on the area where the player is looking.
4k (Score:3)
4k used to mean 3.8k, now it just means ... 2k LOL
Re: (Score:3)
I think it's a valid claim that 2K per eye is 4K since it's 2 separate screens for 4K worth of resolution.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it isn't. Resolution doesn't work that way because your brain doesn't work that way.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, but displays work like that. Count the pixels.
Based on what you're saying no display is 4K because the human doesn't focus their full spatial resolution on an entire screen of content at one go. Shit man I can't even read the time in the bottom right of the screen while writing this to you, does that mean my screen has a lower resolution?
Of course not.
Based on your posting history we know you're not dumb, but why do you constantly look for pointless arguments where there are none?
Re: (Score:1)
Imagine we're still in the monochrome world with a 640x480 resolution. Vendors call them 0.7k displays.
Then monitor makers roll out color monitors, still 640x480 but of course, tripling the subpixels. Would it be right to call these 2k displays?
Re: (Score:3)
No because subpixels and pixels are not the same thing. Just as a software feature called foveated rendering which needs to be applied on an app level has nothing to do pixels addressed on the display. There's no hardware here limiting the addressing of each pixel in these 4K displays, or 12K by your contrived example.
I guess my 4K display ceases to be a 4K display when I watch a 1080p movie by your definition? Don't be silly.
Re: (Score:1)
Hmm maybe 2k sideways plus 2k downward adds up to 4k
Also, wider FOV than the original 110 degrees. So, maybe 115 degrees, who knows?
And what's with the 90-120Hz update frequency, that seems very low
And it's apparently tethered-only.
Sony apparently isn't that crazy about this whole "metaverse" thing
Re: (Score:3)
The 4k is a bogus thing to say to calibrate expectations.
120Hz is pretty high for a VR headset, it's decently high for monitors (some monitors go to 144hz, but I don't think anyone can tell the difference between 120hz and 144 hz even side by side).
Re: (Score:2)
The 4k is a bogus thing to say to calibrate expectations.
The display has a resolution 4000 pixels wide. It's not a bogus thing to say. Heck I didn't even consider the GP's point, but there's clearly multiple justifications to call this headset 4K than there is 2K.
It's also quite consistent with the HP Reverb G2 being sold as a 4K display with its 2160 x 2160 per eye resolution for well over a year now as is the Pixmax 4K (actual model number) with it's resolution of 1920 x 2160 per eye.
Re: (Score:3)
I would say that all the VR headsets saying 4k is bogus in the general marketing realm.
In the consumer electronics space, '4k' monitor generally describes the experience of 4k spread across at most 55 degrees of vision or so. Meanwhile, these are 2,000 pixels spread across 110 degrees of vision, with the '4k' devoted to stereoscopic vision with heavy binocular overlap.
A '4k' VR headset is in the ballpark of 20 pixels per degree, while a 4k TV set viewed pretty close up is around 70 pixels per degree.
'4k' i
Re: (Score:2)
I would say that all the VR headsets saying 4k is bogus in the general marketing realm.
Given it's a marketing term they don't really care what you say. You have the choice to speak the same language or just confuse the issue for no gain.
but we should be realistic here...
If you want to start with realism then you should note that there's a big difference between displaying content on a statically positioned screen at a distance and displaying content on a moving screen which dynamically changes based on head position. Our eyes are actually quite shit. The only reason we make sense of what we see at all is because we move them
Re: (Score:2)
In terms of 'no gain', the 'gain' is to have people accurate know the limitations, and when it comes to advocacy, to have some degree of credibility. If you are willing to admit the shortcomings, but are still engaged, then that speaks to the upside. Latching onto the exact same terminology for VR as for a TV set is misleading and confusing for thtose not in the know. They really should advertise in 'typical PPD'.
With PPD, you absolutely have a common point to compare a TV/monitor to a VR headset. The sam
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A better metric would be pixels per degree. Then there's the panel portion (upper limit of render resolution capabilities, contributor to artifacts like 'screen door effect) and the rendering resolution.
The specs here suggest equivalent to a 55" 720p television from 36" away (~19 pixels per degree). So a game engine really need bother rendering in a manner consistent with 720p for about 3% of the vision around the indicated gaze with such a headset.
This basically brings PSVR to parity with Quest 2 and mos
Re: (Score:2)
That's not true. The maximum resolution is defined by the screen. If I watch a HDTV broadcast my TV isn't suddenly no longer a 4K TV, and when I enable oversampling in games my very old VR headset doesn't magically become 4K either despite the video card sending it 4000 horizontal pixels worth of data.
Re: 4k (Score:2)
I agree it is very misleading. The marketing guys probably came up with that because they know the general public associates 4K with picture clarity. Fact is that this the eye will be getting a 2K image smeared out over 110 degrees. In other words, image fidelity would be terrible and assuming they havenâ(TM)t eliminated the space between pixels, the screen door effect might also be there too.
Re: (Score:2)
Note that while true, making it more in line with a 720p television, it is pretty much 'par' for VR headsets, which are all hovering about that same territory with respect to pixels per degree.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree it is very misleading.
That's only because you've not looked into the industry. All HMDs with roughly 2000 horizontal pixels per eye have been called 4K. Hell The Pixmax 4K even has 4K in the model name.
In other words, image fidelity would be terrible and assuming they havenâ(TM)t eliminated the space between pixels, the screen door effect might also be there too.
The screen door effect is barely relevant in last gen headsets let alone 4K ones.
Re: 4k (Score:2)
Really? Like which one? I see the screen door effect clearly on the Quest 2 (which I own), the Reverb, and even on a Pimax (8k, I believe.) So either you are talking about a different headset, or you have cataracts.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I see the screen door effect clearly on the Quest 2 (which I own)
I didn't say you can't see it. I said it's not relevant. The screen door effect is a problem when you stare at it. It's relevant on computer displays and phones since they display static images and text. It is not relevant when attempting to focus on content that moves between pixels based on head position thanks to the wonderful blurring effect of our eyes.
I don't have cataracts, but rather you have some strange form of OCD that makes you focus on your headset instead of the content being displayed. Heck t
Re: (Score:2)
4k used to mean 3.8k, now it just means ... 2k LOL
What is 2K about a render resolution of 4000x2040? I realise you may be blind in one eye, but just because you can't see have of what the headset is showing you doesn't mean it's not a 4K headset.
Re: (Score:2)
I would consider it 4k if both eyes received all the 4k separately, for example, via projecting the view of a single 240Hz display with alternating shutters. Otherwise it's marketing play with the numbers, we may as well count the subpixels, or multisampling pixels or whatever narrative the headset makers can get away with
Re: (Score:2)
Put a board from the center of a 4K TV to your nose. Did the 4K TV just become a 2K TV? Obviously not, it's still a 4K image, but each eye can see only half of it. Why is this any different?
Re: (Score:2)
I would consider it 4k if both eyes received all the 4k separately
I'm sure you would, unfortunately you don't get to make up the marketing term used. This isn't the only headset using the "4K" moniker with that resolution.
Otherwise it's marketing play with the numbers, we may as well count the subpixels, or multisampling pixels or whatever narrative the headset makers can get away with
Now why would we do that? Pixels are Pixels. There are 4000 wide in this headset. What you chose to do with your eyes or your software doesn't change the number of pixels in the display.
Re: 4k (Score:3)
The eye combines the two perceived pixels into one, therefore it two displays do not double the perceived resolution. Double counting the pixels is a marketing ploy that, as far as I can tell, was cooked up by Pimax.
Re: (Score:2)
The eye combines the two perceived pixels into one, therefore it two displays do not double the perceived resolution.
And your eye is unable to focus on the entire 1080 high row of pixels on a 24" monitor either. Chances are if you're reading this you can't simultaneously read the time from the bottom right of your screen. Does that mean we call your monitor Full HD because it you can't look or perceive the full array of pixels all at once?
Honestly it doesn't matter what you think. The marketing of all headsets is quite universal when talking about their full capabilities. Want to guess what the resolution of a Pixmax 4K h
Foveated rendering (Score:3)
I would be very surprised, pleasantly, if they actually have foveated rendering working reasonably reliably. Foveated rendering is really hard to implement for various different eye types.
Eye tracking for obvious reasons? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure if this is something they’re trying to address or not, but human eyes engage in micro-saccades all the time that we generally aren’t even aware of. Little more than a barely perceptible vibration of the eye. One result of that slight movement is that it produces a minuscule parallax effect that aids in depth perception, even if you’re otherwise holding still and only using one eye, akin to if you shifted your head around to get a better sense of an object, though obviously not as
No external cameras... (Score:1)
One article I read said something about no external cameras, but that has been pretty useful for the Oculus Quest in order to see the area around you while playing (when you get too close to the edge of a defined play area). So I wonder what they are doing about awareness of surroundings in VR space... maybe they just aren't worrying about that.
I also thought it was odd there was zero mention of the controllers, I really hope it's not the same as the Move controllers that need an external camera to sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks (Score:1)
The other article I had read was a lot shorter on details and no images of the controllers, interesting.
Oooh VR AND HDR?! (Score:1)
Resolution is only half the battle (Score:2)