The Walking Dead PSVR2 Looks Generations Apart from Meta Quest 2

Smh my head, VR is dead, it's deader than other niches like the smartphone or the sun, the PSVR2 is dead on arrival and is kill.

Words words, Meta bad.

Yeah, all the launch ports were just basic ports of old quest games without enhancement, so it wasn’t too apparent, but anything made moving forward should be leagues apart even from quest 3 because they are made at the same time and it’s just easier to dumb things down for quest than spruce them up for VR2 and PSVR

Just to note also, this runs at native 90hz on PSVR2, so no reprojection issues mercifully.

@Wolfie_Pie
That’s a fair point. Although it also doesn’t really show how much better the screen looks on VR2 compared to the quest 2, which can’t be compensated for by the PC. Plus the much narrower field of view. Also, the compression needed for the link would degrade things in that scenario also.

Plus:

https://youtu.be/MksYLAPksHM

According to that the PSVR2 version looks better than the PC version for now. That will potentially change of course.

Isn’t this like comparing the Ps5 to the Switch?

That's nice and all, but with Quest 3 around the corner, it's PSVR2 vs Quest 3 comparisons that will be much more interesting to see. PSVR2 is still going to be much more powerful but it's going to be interesting to see if that power is actually utilized in games where the Quest 3 will likely be a superior headset running inferior rendering.

@Wolfie_Pie True, but then that's not a comparison of PSVR2 to Quest 2, that's a comparison of PSVR2 to PCVR.

@HotGoomba VR isn’t just dead, it’s been MURDERED (and that’s okay)

@NEStalgia
The differences between q2 and 3 will not be significant. Not unless eye tracking and FR is included (which it isn’t going to be). And when comparing to PSVR2 even less significant (the resolution per eye will be above Q2 for example but on par with PSVR2).

Sure it’ll be able to have better textures and such then q2, but the comparisons like this will likely be the same in terms of cutbacks.

Q3 is really going to double down on AR unfortunately. Which won’t help gaming at all

I mean it should be, but I would've preferred a psvr1 to 2 comparison tbh.

@NeonPizza LOL @HotGoomba 's sarcasm must have had so much motion blur you didn't see any of it!

@thefourfoldroot1 I expect that Q3 will have better optics (pancake) and possibly a better screen (faster refresh, better pixel arrangement.) But of course much worse rendering, and maybe no eye tracking/foveation.

I'm actually not bothered much at all by the fresnel lenses of VR2, but it took me weeks and over 70 hours of play before I finally found the right sweet spot to actually have a properly clear image. Once i found it I get it every time (almost) now, but I do feel that that fresnel/sweet spot issue is a monumental weakness, not because it can't be clear under the right conditions but because a large portion of players will never know that!

It's a good compromise weakness because once you know, it's not a problem at all. But it's a big market growth weakness because it'll turn many people away thinking it's not as good as it is.

Quest 3 and AppleVR's focus on AR is depressing though. I get it, and I get there's not many ways out of the market largely ignoring VR but maybe able to get into AR, but It'll be a shame if VR gets heavily sidelined. There was an interview with Sakaguchi (FF fame) and he's interested in VR (wooo!) but he feels like VR isn't very widely adopted and feels maybe AR is the better path, just in order to reach players, really. But I get the impression that's a business determination but he personally would be interested in VR more.

@NeonPizza LOL!

@NEStalgia
Well, it’ll be 120hz, which is an improvement over Q2 at least. Might have RGB I guess. No doubt it’ll be an improvement over the Q2 of course. I too like the VR2 screen. Would have preferred RGB and better resolution, but to actually have proper darks is so good. I never thought it would make such a difference.

Take that Zuckerberg

Tried psvr2 at the start of the week and.... the jury's still out. Gt7 was very good but horizon was awful, more of a tech demo and the blurriness was bad. Missus wants to get it for my birthday but really want to see the quest 3 before I commit

Honestly, the Quest is kinda like the mobile phone gaming of the VR world.

@NeonPizza yeah and your probably right resi 8 is a big draw for me too but haven't tried it yet. I really enjoy vr and was day 1 on the first psvr which blew my mind ( my only prior experience of vr was in the mid 90s at the ideal home exhibition) and then I got the quest 2 as a gift a couple of years ago and it felt like a huge upgrade. Graphics on par if not a little worse but the controllers and being able to freely move around was game changing. With friends round its so much more fun to use the q2 for something like pistol whip and watch them rolling around on the floor to avoid the walls/bullets. I've been critical of the psvr2 before the launch due to the wire but playing it I know I could enjoy sitted games very much but there are other issues that I don't think are talked about as much. The overall resolution definitely doesn't feel like 4k and the 'sweet spot' that people mention is true.

@Tharsman good point, more accurate equivelent though would be comparing a PS2 to PS5.

@thefourfoldroot1 I don't even mind the resolution. I mean sure more is better but only if the machine can render that higher res. PS5 can't. Quest 5 won't be able to. It's pointless extra pixels without the 4090 driving it. I think the side filter is a perfect compromise the does with a piece of plastic what software would use 10% of it's power blurring pixels together.

The lenses/sweet spot and questionable hdr/overdrive configuration are the real weak points. But. I suspect q3 will have poor black levels again. It's still a backlit lcd and there's only so much that can do. The lens issue on vr2 is a trade-off. You can't use pancake lenses with OLED because they lose a LOT of light and OLED has much less light than led backlights. So sweet spot vs black levels is the trade. I definitely think the hmd is better than good, and better than the hardware utilizes. What's rendering full 4k at 90 or 120 other than rez and song in smoke right now? This headset would get better on ps6 which means it's a pretty good headset for the hardware

If only the darned sweet spot issue didn't exist orle would be much higher opinion of it I think. Not an issue for me anymore though. But so many people having trouble with that.

@NeonPizza @Deljo I still have to see how I feel about the early game in horizon. I always loved it technically, being a big horizon fan its great, but the vr rock climbing thing is kinda cool and unique. But it felt plagued with technical visual issues. However in the late game I've found I'm really really enjoying it visually, too. I'm not sure if it's me adapting to it (and lowering brightness) or if it's visually inconsistent. I suspect the later. Because the town area and talking to people still seems terrible. But the climbing areas are quite visually nice to play. I think the late game features more interior areas and places with restricted draw distance and it renders higher internal res and just looks more 3d. Because I then went into an outdoor battle area and it felt bad again. Then back to limited areas are good. I'd say stick with it, lower the brightness, and play until you get to Nora territory, climbing the Horus, etc. Also the end sequence has a very good looking awesome thing I won't spoil but if you're a series fan it's very cool. I'm playing with brightness 9 (one above half) and it's decent

Also for the love of Gaia, don't dare use smooth turning on that game. It will ruin the whole thing. Just deal with snap turn. I have the most iron of iron vr stomachs, but smooth turn in horizon is disorienting and fatigues my eyes.

@Deadlyblack It's literally a mobile device ruining Android...

@NeonPizza Yeeahh I'll believe that whole PS5 pro thing when I see it .... By the time it makes any sense it's time to prep for ps6 unless they're genuinely giving up generations.

@NeonPizza heh also I don't think one qualifies as vr hound without a monster pc rig

@NEStalgia
Well, the thing about the lenses for me is not the sweet spot, although I agree it would stop people potentially being disappointed when they first put it on incorrectly, the problem with these type of lenses for me is that they don’t have as much edge to edge clarity. But I guess I only notice it when trying to.

I also agree that the OLED screen was a much better call than LCD, but it would be better if it was RGB as it would have better sub pixel resolution and I think would have removed the last small traces of the sde. Although I do appreciated it harder to use this as the actual screen resolution increases.

As to the games at 90fps, well, s&s2 is native 90fps, as is light brigade (albeit with much simpler visuals), and people don’t complain about the sharpness there. Blur in motion I think is being incorrectly attributed to the OLED for historical reasons, when it’s mainly poor reprojection software when that’s used.

@Wolfie_Pie retribution isn't out on pc yet?it comes out the same day as psvr2 version?

Is this really a case of a downgrade for a non-tethered system? If so, it presents a strong argument for having that cable and additional processing power.

I’ve never understood the obsession the preference for VR headsets being wireless. The internal battery adds bulk (and heat) and of course all the computing power needs to be onboard. A physical cable doesn’t really inhibit movement that much, if at all.

I don’t recall seeing a more noticeable gulf in versions of the same game since Shadow of Mordor on PS3/PS4. The former was a version that shouldn’t have been made/released and the same argument could be presented here. The Quest version presents a dramatically altered vision of the game in terms of aesthetics. When compared to the PS version, it looks incredibly comprised and the immersive experience is just not going to be the same considering the quality (or lack thereof) of the visuals. Textures look incredibly bad to not even there in places - the amount of plain-coloured, blurry, muddy textures in place of actual art assets is bordering on appalling.

Perhaps this is just a cash-grab. This shouldn’t have passed quality control.

Can tell many differences, look like HD and 4K difference.

As a gamer, if there's an option, I'll always go immersive. Flat is not the way to game.

@Wolfie_Pie but that's the standalone version....the pc version on any platform hasn't released yet

Meta forces the game out early due to exclusivity.
Game looks and runs like crap.

Dev takes time after release to properly finish the game for PSVR2.
People surprised it looks good.

Bottom line is that Meta is garbage

@thefourfoldroot1 Yeah the edge to edge clarity sucks and you can also see the fresnel rings on the sides on bright backgrounds which is annoying. Though like you said now that I do have the sweet spot I only really see it if I'm shifting my eyes farther than I do in real life... Which I tend to do in vr for some reason which I don't like because it tends to hurt the muscles in the corner of the eyes.

But.... No OLED otherwise...

Definitely rgb would be better, though, again might be an OLED trade-off. This is the same layout used in OLED smartphones (Samsung etc) so there must be a reason this configuration is used on small screens. Don't know what but I'm sure there's a technical reason above our heads. Maybe heat generation or power availability something?

There's a good video neon linked to back a few weeks ago that shows why the motion issue happens. The lights are actually always full bright and controlled dimming is just done by off time. At Max bright it's just always on never of so the refresh time lags when going bright to dark. The in lens slowed footage shows a black "shutter" crossing the screen, clearing the pixels on lower brightness but never at max. Basically Max bright is functioning like overdrive on an lcd panel a little with the overshoot effects, similar but different. In my opinion nobody should ever use Max bright. Not only is it too bright for prolonged exposure so that distance, but achieving the huge hdr wow factor comes at the cost of not really using the display optimally. You trade more accurate image for more HDR wow contrast. It's like vivid mode on demo TV's in the store. Looks great in best buy and the first thing you do is turn it off when you get it home

@Deljo you need Pavlov on PSVR2. Graphics are great, super immersive control scheme and various different modes each with completely different game play.

Pavlov and GT7 alone make the price worth it IMO. Got a bunch of games still sitting there untouched cause these 2 are so good!

Well that's because it quite literally is, I'm not sure why it's news that a 10.8 tflops GPU in a powerful games console renders graphics significantly better then a lower power mobile chip

@NEStalgia
The original psvr1 was RGB, it’s just more difficult / expensive with higher pixel density I understand. But of a shame but no big deal.

I should be getting a bit of a clarity increase today as I get my new, larger glasses (currently I can “see” over the top a little, so when looking up with my eyes things get a bit more blurry lol). And then, hopefully, my prescription inserts arrive soon. The manufacturer just received the lenses from their supplier and are waiting to allocate to my order to then put in the frames, so hopefully a week or two and I’ll have them. Won’t improve the slight blur at the edge of the lenses of course, but should let me push the headset closer to my eyes so it’ll be less an issue.

Yes, the black frame insertion issues are annoying. Partially down to the screen used. I always lower my brightness anyway as high brightness scenes look a little washed out without the deep shadows, but it’s on a game by game basis. I’m playing Cave Digger 2 at the moment (highly recommended) and have it set to zero as it really suits the aesthetic. There’s no blurring in the game or mura that I can see even on max brightness, but still feel it just looks best at zero. Other games I have higher.

@Wolfie_Pie it’s not out on pc yet so which videos were they?

Compare PSVR2 version to the pc version running on a 2080, both about 10TF, when released of course. That would be interesting and valid.

@Vacuumator not at all mate. They are comparing the PS5 version to one running on a mobile phone chipset.
They do state it’s. It the pc version but it appears many of this thread have leapt to that incorrect assumption.

10TF PS5 outperforms 1TF Mobile chipset. That’s all the article says.

@thefourfoldroot1 vr1 was an anomaly. It was rgb, but it had black levels that made IPS look good. Idk what what screen was but it was an OLED that had neither the strengths nor weaknesses of OLED. Really weird screen. This one is more what you'd think a mobile OLED would be.

Ahh interesting that you adjust the brightness per game too. That explains why you never were bothered by the screen issues. Yeah I think Max is too bright and at times blows out highlights, it's bad hdr calibration out of the box.

I've found one click above half to be right for most games. Gr7i feel like the motion issues show up and 1/4 is good. Low brightness looks bad. Quarter looks dim but a real race car driver has a mirror helmet visor so it's more realistic . I love cave digger 2 as well . I haven't tried dim on that. Games like moss that have bad sd gamma curves get weird. Dark scenes only look right at 0 but then everything else is too dark.

@lindos

Perhaps, rather than this being purely a technical discussion, it could be suggested that it is also an artistic one. We are used to different systems and generations of consoles performing differently across versions of the same game, but it cannot be argued that what is presented here shows a huge divide in terms of quality. Granted, it’s a mobile chipset against the raw power of the PS5, but it appears that the Quest version severely compromises the vision intended by the developers.

As this is a game that likely relies on its aesthetics in order to create atmosphere, is it not the case that the player would be less immersed in the experience, because the visuals don’t deliver what they need to? Is the developer pleased that that got the game running on the Quest, or disappointed that it really doesn’t deliver the same experience?

I really can’t think of a recent game where versions across systems look so different, apart from the previously mentioned Shadow of Mordor. Players may prefer to play games on certain platforms depending on where a game might perform best, but in this case, the weaker platform really doesn’t appear to convey the developer’s original intent for their product.