Talking Point: Is It Officially Game Over for PSVR2?

I don't like VR as it detaches you from the world way too much.

I own it and haven't used it recently, but I also don't regret my purchase one bit. I never expected it to be the way I play all the time, but have really enjoyed what I have played.

Bought the PSVR2 at launch. Immediately underwhelmed with the lack of support. Picked up the Quest 3 at launch and haven't looked back.

I don’t own one yet, but I’d love to. The price point is a bit of a dealbreaker for me, and the limited game library/support doesn't help either. That said, there are some really awesome-looking games on there! Hopefully, I’ll be able to grab one eventually

@Bamila That's what I love most about it, lol.

"There’s a big piece of context here that we must address before we continue: Beat Games is owned and operated by Oculus Studios"

The only reason Sony bothered with VR at all was to keep Meta in check, so Oculus pulling support only tells me they're gaining some ground. I've never even tried Beat Saber on PSVR 1 or 2. Granted, if Meta gets more aggressive on this stuff and Sony keeps doing what it's doing, then yeah, it's over. I highly doubt there's going to be a definitive "end" for this peripheral, unless Sony announces they'll stop certifying 3rd party VR games or there's a PSVR 3.

I feel like there are already a good few titles that make my purchase worth it. Anything that is going to be released in future is welcome obviously.
I still play GT with friends a good few times a week and After the fall.

It died the minute the video game industry started taking a downturn. Developing this kind of market is for the boom periods.

The biggest reason I never got a PSVR2 is how much of a pain it is to set up the original the odd time you wanted to play something on it. I love Astro Bot and RE7, but not enough to spend ages fiddling about with the HDMI cables, when I could just play RE7 without VR instead.

@Mr-Elusive Because like a lot of other VR games, if you take that immersive element away, the games are just walking simulators with better controls. As much as I love Half Life Alyx, it souls be boring as standard game using keyboard and mouse.

I owned the original, but I gifted it to my nephews in preparation for upgrading to PSVR2. In the end I never got around to picking one up.

I feel its a strange time to give up on it when there is tons of games out for it (not first party) Its doing well with third party support but a huge mistake for not including a first party astrobot or mini game package.

I could be wrong but didn’t the original psvr launch without a camera and the (important later on) move controllers?
Suddenly that $399 isn’t so affordable.

PS. Undead citadel just released a trailer...arriving next week.

Got to say, I do really regret getting one a few weeks after they released. It's not really bad the games or support I was expecting.

@Bamila isn't that the idea? Not sure if you are being sarcastic or not.

I'd be interested in buying the vr2 headset because I own gt7 and the original dirt rally and both support vr. But it's going to have to drop significantly in price to make it viable for me.

The problems are the obvious stuff for it.

Too expensive for some people even after all this time.

The library is really limited and needed all the games from the first one to justify the price.

It can be annoying to wear for a few reasons which still haven't been improved.

Support for anything third party is far and few this console generation as it's been for specific stuff instead of everything like the old days.

When VR is talked about, it's either brief in PlayStation videos or about Meta Quest.

They haven't promoted it as well as they did the original and it has shown with the console being niche in a market where VR and anything not standard should become more widely accepted.

@Northern_munkey
Dirt Rally is only PSVR1 compatible.
Also I think unless you have purchased the VR dlc (or have the complete disc) then you may be out of luck as it has been delisted. It was pretty great though and I put many hours into that game, all in VR.

I was always surprised at the lack of flightsims on PSVR and be extension it’s successor. I think the only ones I recall on PS4 were Ace Combat 7 and Ultrawings. I just feel that arcade flightsims and semi-realistic ones could always work on a console; looking back at the PS2 era there were tonnes of flightsim style games such as Ace Combat, Lethal Skies, Energy Air Force, Sky Odyssey, Aero Elite and several commercial airline games in Japan. Many of these would have been crying for a VR mode. Unfortunately arcade flightsims started to fizzle up in the 7th Gen and then fell off a cliff in the 8th Gen.

I love mine. I probably often play more than once a week but it ebbs and flows. I should note that it’s predominantly on GT7 with a seat and wheel which is a lot of money when it bought it. Easily 2x what I paid for my PS5 at launch. But it’s some of best money I’ve spent on entertainment. The kind of stuff if I told 14 year old me I’d be doing at age 40 I wouldn’t have believed me. Not everyone is fortunate enough to have that kind of scratch, I’ll admit that. But I paid full price for everything and never regretted it. Love all of the rhythm games, Walkabout Golf, Legendary Tales, etc as well. Half of my regular rotation games are PSVR2 titles.

@Medic_alert
It is a great bit of kit and this last year has seen some really good games not to mention only a few months ago we got one of the best games on system with Hitman.
These doom articles do amuse me because at this point in time the software library is quite extensive although I’m not blind to the multitude of missteps by Sony.

The biggest negative for me and the reason I delayed purchase was the lack of backward compatibility and lack of first party releases/ports (someone explain to me how Persistence is on PCVR but not Psvr2 even though we already have a PS5 version).

It’s all very dramatic in here lately.

I can’t wait to see them announce a new game for PSVR2 and all these articles be magically forgotten about.

Still playing a few times a week. Just too many games and not enough time. Plus I can play Resi4 for the rest of my life without it getting old.

@get2sammyb
Now you made me really, really want Stella Blade in VR2 😭

@CaptD well that sucks. I bought the disc last week cheap off ebay and its a brilliant game. Oh well at least I can use my t598 wheel on it and it's damn nice too. Thanks for the heads up bud 👍

For me Beat Saber is one of the few games I can enjoy because I get motion sickness.
I also love it and think it's one of the best games ever.

So for me - this is a sign that my time with PSVR2 is coming to an end. I love love love that game, but am I better off selling the PSVR2 and getting an oculus instead just for beat Saber?

I bought a Quest 2 for my son a few years back. Tried it once or twice, and it was neat. I like how it's a standalone box but can also be a VR display for PC. I don't think I could play for more than 20 minutes or so at a time. I don't like having a thing on my head or being too disconnected from everything around me. Neat technology, but not for me.

It's always been a niche product, and it always will be. No joke, some weeks I game upwards of 40-50 hours, and I play pretty much everything except multiplayer-only titles, exclusively on PlayStation consoles to boot. And not once, not ever, have I been tempted to purchase either of the PSVR headsets.

Is the device still worth getting, been meaning to get one for a while now and I have a feeling it's going to drop in price by atleast another £100 on black friday which would probably persuade me to get one.

Does this one have the big screen app for standard PS5 games? That's another big selling point for me as I can play non VR games on "the big screen" whilst the TV is being used by others.

Astro bot VR was one of the greatest games ever made and Sony never followed up! Which is a shame plus no BC and a $599 price means death is inevitable!

I don't want it to fail tho.

Sony simply haven't done nearly enough. I'm all in on VR but you need a supported ecosystem and that basically leaves you with the Quest for standalone and PCVR - a combination of which has been a revelation in my 40 years of gaming. It still takes my breath away to fly a fighter jet anywhere in the world in MS Flight Simulator or to play through Alien Isolation with the VR mod that now includes full motion and hand tracking controls. Then there is Asgaards Wrath 2 which is basically God Of War meets Breath of the Wild. And if you like the Batman Arkham games.... There actually exists a good variety of excellent VR experiences and games but it's still not a well marketed medium.

I picked up a PSVR2 at launch. Games including but not limited to Underdogs, Rez Infinite, Humanity, Before Your Eyes, Synapse, GT7 (insanely the interiors of the cars are fully modeled), Pistol Whip, Humanity and Tetris Effect are a lot of fun.

Still the entry price is high, the lack of B/C is disappointing (and I get that VR gaming (like every other type of gaming and of course gaming itself) isn’t for everyone but there have been great games built around the tech and great games which merely benefit from the tech (after Wipeout Omega Collection on the PSVR1 and GT7 on the PSVR2 I can’t enjoy flatscreen racers anymore).

Also one can’t say enough nice things about the excellent OLED lens. Bright colors and deep blacks.

Clearly support is declining but I expect my PSVR2 is going to keep seeing regular use (though most of my gaming is flatscreen) until the PS6’s PSVR3 (with B/C with both its predecessors and a surprisingly low price point) in 2030 😋.

Recently picked up the PC adapter, currently playing Fallout 4 VR, will no doubt spend more time on this game, than all the previous games I played via PS5. PSVR2 via PS5 has many good smaller VR games, but no games with big worlds worth exploring. The original PSVR best game was Skyrim VR, which is better than anything currently playable on PSVR2 on PS5.

Purchased at launch out of curiosity.
I’d firstly say that the vm is jaw dropping if you’ve never seen it in action .before. Niece and nephew really enjoyed it (under supervision).

Going forward I don’t really use it and it’s on my list of things to sell. I think there are good games out for it, I just don’t have the time and it also get motion sickness.

Finally I don’t like not being able to see the real world once I have the headset on.

All in all I thought it a good addition and support ps for trying something new, though they should have supported more games. I’ve got the money to waste on trying, so don’t mind taking a loss when I sell it.

I've said the before but I'll say it again, the state of VR right now isn't exactly good. The only ones pushing for it anymore are meta anyway, and the sales of the quest 3 aren't great either. And with sony chasing the live service dream it seems in the end they were in the VR space just in case it exploded.

I love mine for the games I have on it especially GT7 and I wish others would try it, but most are too stubborn or can't handle the initial VR sickness so it'll never be mainstream.

Only way VR might get big is if they released a VR2 quality esque headset that's dirt cheap (even if it's unrealistic) at like £100.

It WAS officially over when they announced PCVR support.

I think wiredVR only has a place for high-end PC enthusiasts; PSVR2 was kinda doomed from the start dropping when standalone is commonplace and limiting compatibility to a home console. They should've either made it standalone (and backwards compatible, so everyone with a PSVR would upgrade), or made a wired cross-compatible with PS5 and PC — and PS4, for that matter. And, you know...more games. More games would've helped.

Oh well. Another failed Sony peripheral. Gotta see what they manage with the handheld market now. Although I really don't think they'll be converting many Deckers or Switchers.

@Bamila I think it's fine in limited bursts. But I'd definitely be feelin' some kinda way if I had them on for 4+ hours.

@yoda87960 If Sony's goal with PSVR was to keep Meta in check, they failed miserably.

Was my first vr and most likely will be my last ....simply put I CBA to play onit ...it's a real chore for me ...I prefer to just sit back with a normal controller and normal TV

I'm not one of those people who hate Jim Ryan, but he is responsible for the half-hearted launch. PlayStation was releasing a brand new hardware product and the only thing it did to promote the launch was a blog post! There should have at least been a 30 minute State of Play going through its capabilities and highlighting games. People want to be sold to, and it would've helped create a greater launch momentum. Maybe Sony should wait until the PS7 generation to launch another.

I don't care what anyone says, I'm having fun with it. Gran Turismo is a blast and I don't even like racers. Synapse was a loads of fun. Resident Evil was great. Hitman is fun.

The interwebs is such a killer of good time vibes.

@AdamNovice Climate Station?

I don't think an interactive climate lesson that's playable without VR really invalidates anything in this article or saves PSVR2 from obscurity.

Also, incidentally, kinda ironic a hardware/software company would put out something detailing the irreparable damage we've done to our climate. Reads like the billion-dollar conglomerate version of community service.

PSVR2 was excellent hardware, with 2 critical problems for me:

• Lack of support - particularly in AAA games.
• Wires

Either alone would have been enough to stop me buying it.
(Though I am pleased that, reading above, some of those who bought it enjoyed it).

@StopBeingTribal Never let the Internet kill your good vibes. It's all just noise; at a certain point, it's less the Internet's fault for being toxic and more yours for letting that irrelevant toxicity bend you.

I guess that's my PSA for the day. Regardless, I don't think anyone besides trolls are dogging on people enjoying the thing. It's just, with such miniscule support, it's hard to objectively say it's a good purchase. You know, I have an Atari VCS and have gotten a lot of enjoyment out of it. But I absolutely would not say it's a great console, and would advise anyone but the most specifically tailored for it to avoid it.

created an account just to leave my two cents: bought the horizon bundle at launch and have absolutely loved using the psvr whenever I can (and was extra pleased with the PC adapter that let me access my already huge PCVR library)

RE:Village, RE4, Hitman, Synapse, and TWD:SS have all been standouts for me and I wished the headset got more love from first party studios. I'll pray that Capcom implement a VR mode for Requiem too but I'm not holding my breath 😂

@dschons yep, it's the fact you can detach and escape from the real world, that really appeals to me.

They could've made a killzone or resistance game for psvr2. They could've brought out the time crisis series. Imagine if cyberpunk 2077 had vr, ala resident evil 4, or rdr2. Seems like a lot of missed opportunities, that's all.

I bought the first gen but barely used it. I quickly realized that wearing it for more than 20 minutes was akin to torture and I just stopped trying. Cool experience though, it was impressive looking.

It’s a shame Sony haven’t supported PSVR2 in better capacity and makes you wonder why they even released it knowing they probably didn’t have the resources to support it.

Let’s face it they barely have the resources to support the PS5 itself with output that’s slowed to a game a year. A far cry from years gone by and yes I know games take longer to make blah blah but they’re not stupid and have known this was the trend for over a decade.

I’m not surprised Herman was demoted and feel he should go back to studio work.

Picked one up last year when it was “cheap,” and really loved what I’ve played. That said, my main problem is when I hop on to a game late at night after a long day, the last thing I want to do is stand in my living room, wailing about, getting all amped up, and doing the opposite of relaxing.

Don't be a see you next Tuesday.... take today off.

@Midnyte-Monkey that's on you. Not VR.

@Rich33 well im sorry a wire! Stopped you enjoying some of this gens greatest experiences. Must be hard living in your world we're everyday something reminds you it isn't perfect....

@UltimateOtaku91 yes

Ultimately the best VR games are titles like Tetris Effect and Rez Infinite that try to do something original with the hardware instead of just shoehorning in a title that would be better elsewhere. Beat Saber could have been a PSMove title and lost nothing.

You don't need an expensive headset to enjoy Tetris Effect.

@SJR nothing limited about the games. Ge it enjoy it, simple

@RadioHedgeFund go away... stay away.

“People don’t want VR”
Yes we do. They just can’t make it affordable and comfortable yet.

I loved the PSVR. I bought a PS5 largely because I wanted the PSVR2
I have never bought a PSVR2 because nothing that released gave me a reason to spend the money for one.

@teh_jokr not really puzzling as every game would need to redesign all the controls with how different the controllers are.

They should have at least done their own games though, I mean wipeout uses a pad so doesn't even need tracking.

But do love my psvr2, most emersive headset.

I appreciated the jump from PSVR to PSVR2, and I can play it for long sessions with no ill effects, there have been some okay games for it, but I bought it about a month after it came out, since then it's become clear PlayStation had no intent to throw much weight behind it. Which is a shame, if you already have a PS5 it's the perfect step into VR, but even with the recent price reduction it's just not a value product compared to the alternatives. GT7 in VR is bloody hard to beat though.

@Woods-PS Well, yeah, obviously. Hence the personal opinion and experience. 🥴

Thanks for being one of the few articles that actually mention that the company is owned by meta.

But Meta has thrown away huge amounts of money on vr selling the headsets for a loss and paying studios to make games there is no chance in recouping.
Do you really think they wouldn't be willing to loose money removing beat saber from psvr2?
I have both quest3 and psvr2 love them both, played over vr 100 games over the past year, rarely play any flat screen games anymore as they just bore me now.

i like the headset i just wish hulu still supported vr ,

@CaptD no, that's wrong. It came with the camera and move controllers.

Wow. Divisive subject much? VR's either for your or it's not. Plain and simple. It's fine if it's not. It won't be for everyone. But the people it's for don't care that it's "not for some people." On PSVR1/2 I've played well over 50 legit great games. Incredible experiences more like. Throw in the PC adapter and it added another 10 or so to the list. It's not just a novelty and the feeling I get from it never wears off. It never ceases to be amazing you are IN the game. This is Tron IRL.

This market is tough. This industry is tough. VR is niche. Honestly 50-60 awesome games on VR exceeds my expectations. It's plenty more than enough when you've also got plenty of other great flatscreen games to play too. Sure I wish more studios could be devoted to VR but I completely understand why they can't. All the more reason that makes the greats that do even more great because they are truly coming from a place of love. Frankly if you know you just know. If you don't, you don't. Both can exist.

Honestly though right now flat games just continue rehashing flat games. Graphical advances are so far along the advances feel unnoticeable. Like we're plateauing. No one dare innovates except Nintendo but even they are doing a lot of rehashing. If you're not tired of the same old same old, wonderful. If you are, VR breaks the mold for now. The next evolutionary leap in videogames is probably coming when they've figured out how to make AI take them to the next level while still maintaining their artistry. The risk though is that the artistry can get lost. Time will tell. But right now VR feels like an artist's blank canvas where something new can still be done and shared.

Propelling that VR is dying is doing one thing and one thing only and that is helping to kill VR. Instead we should be lifting it up if we support new forms of storytelling and new experiences. I hope that it lives on if only for the reason that it may be a refuge from more and more of the same old same old.

You can actually find random periods where the headsets go on sale with up to $200 off, so as low as $350-400.

And I keep saying it, but PS Home would ultimately do it. They need a VRChat-like. That plus all the mini games they could throw in would demo it for free. From experiences made specifically for it, to levels from existing VR games. You gotta have the ability to give people a level of fomo with your product. I'm just a bit annoyed that they could have taken this route to cover their first party live service urges. Not only that, but there's so much cross promotion potential and it could really help their sales with so many other things across the board. All of that not including how far we've come since their PS3 attempt. Fast loading is practically a selling point for the PS5. A lot of tedium from before would be gone.

Also, I would bite the bullet to make Astro Bot Rescue mission work on this thing. Whatever it needs, it gets. Already earned it's valor on the last headset and now it's practically a no brain--

Hold up. Isn't there a special controller?

Im a fan of VR. I owned the PSVR and Oculus from a few years back, but they released the PSVR2 to quickly.

I had a strong feeling because of this it was gonna fail, and they were basically going to abandon it, which is mostly been the case.

They should’ve skipped the entirety of the PS five generation for VR and brought it back a couple years into the PS6 generation.

I want a vr headset. But I don't see myself getting one anytime soon. Maybe when it's better with better games.

Price is the only reason I don’t own one. Would love to play Gran Turismo though! Maybe one day in the future if there’s another deep sale like that one time….. that’s a huge maybe.

back to the main question: yes, it is certainly over for ps vr and has been for some time. it's over for vr on the whole, across the entire industry... for now. it might make a resurgence in another 10+ years when things advance more, but it has been such a collossal failure that i don't know who will be willing to get back into the ring.

@AdamNovice

What game was that?

@AdamNovice I guess... It's kinda like if there was an article about the SNES dropping off and losing support, and someone commented, "Mario is Missing JUST came out."

Which is funny. But I don't think quite in the same way you were going for.

I bought it awhile after launch, I don't regret it, it was fun, but couple times a month doesn't warrant what I paid, it's expensive dust collector, and I feel sony is done with it, and probably won't be supported much if at all on ps6 l, so time to sell it on before it's gets alot cheaper than the purchase price

I’m in the 2% of people having sold their PS VR2. I liked it, I was really impressed by the quality. For me the disadvantages were bigger though. It was too much of a hassle to set it up every time and clear the room. Besides that, it didn’t really fit well into my backlog. I like to eat chunks out of it and these are mainly games for sessions in between without actually beating the game. Besides that, it didn’t help that I’m high sensitive (HSP), this experience creates a lot of triggers for my brain.

It was nice while it lasted though. Don’t regret buying one and I sold it for an okay price.

@Woods-PS Come on, you've got to admit that disembodied hands and teleportation is no way to offer immersion in a game. It's the VR equivalent of touchscreen buttons: a shoehorned control method for games better suited to other platforms.

But the games made specifically for VR, the ones that couldn't have just been done on the Wii? Those games are insane. Tetris Effect is worth buying a Quest 2 just to play. This is what I meant about not needing an expensive headset when a cheaper one will do the job. It's not the same playing it on a TV.

Heres the whole thing i don't get about VR. Ive never tried a headset that was comfortable with my corrective lenses ( glasses). It would not be too much more expensive to give vr sets the ability to correctly “autorefract” as part of the calibration. At least then i may consider one, pending games and quality, cause i could not wear my glasses. Until then, they aren't even a blip on my radar.

This article is purely about Meta taking a public pop at their rivals with the better gaming headset. Beat Sabre appears to have had a 2 year exclusivity with Sony, which has come to an end. Can still play everything, especially as I've never bought an DLC and still can. Very happy with GT, RE 4 and Village, Hitman, NMS, Smash Drums, etc, as I love VR. I hear the Meta Quest 3 headset hadn't sold as much as they like, because like the PSVR2, they're both expensive when people don't have lots of spate money, but at least the games (as a whole) are a little cheaper than flat ones.

@aj21009
Not originally.
https://www.roadtovr.com/playstation-vr-what-you-do-and-dont-get-in-the-box/
Eventually after the launch they added a camera and then a Skyrim bundle (the one I bought) but even then no moves.

VR in general still hasn't really taken off but psvr2 has felt abit pointless with hardly any support

Funnily enough, I'm considering getting a PSVR2 because I've been playing a lot with my PSVR and PS4 lately. In my opinion, VR games are the future. I've been dreaming of this immersive experience for a long time. It makes me sad that there's so little effort being put into developing these kinds of games. I think an F1 game, Fight Night, Call of Duty, and Fortnite in VR could truly be game-changers for the platform!

I do find this amusing. When there are far more VR games I still have left to play compared to flat ones.

@Leetware1
Would be nice, but no big deal. I just sent my prescription off and got clip on lenses for £35. Never had to wear glasses in the headset as that would be less comfortable and I’d be scared about scratching.

@thefourfoldroot1 How many of those are AAA games though? There are quite some entertaining games for PS VR2, but apart from GT7 and both RE games there aren’t a lot of AAA among them.

@Darude84
Most of the games I play flat are not AAA. Most AAA games bore the hell out of me. I think the last one I played was the original Horizon on PS4.

Edit: actually no, it was Hogwarts PS5. But as great as I could tell it was, I got bored and didn’t finish it.

VR provides something truly new and immersive for those of us gaming for 40+ years already.

And just as Meta owned Beat Sabre removes PSVR2 support, a new X Box based Meta Quest 3 headset appears....

Still today, Half Life: Alyx and Stormlands on PC, and Astrobot on PSVR1, is the best experiences I've had in VR. Sadly those AAA days of VR seems to be dead and gone now.
I had some hopes about Horizon on PSVR2, but it mostly felt like a tech demo, and hated being locked inside a circle, everytime you got into combat.

I may play VR for a week or two, 2-3 times a year, but that's about it.
The novelty and wow factor, is long gone, as you quickly notice the clunky controls and poor gameplay, in 95 % of the VR game out there.

But I will never forget the experience, when I got my HTC Vive, back in 2016. That wow factor, was on the same level, as when I discovered videogames, as a kid, during the Atari2600 era.

it was clear from quite a while ago, due to lackluster portfolio, no clear roadmap, general problems in 1st party games (too much emphasis on GAAS development) leading to whole teams being disbanded or reset to start new projects in the middle of their dev cycle etc.

Sony made a really bad move chasing unicorns, spanning 2-3 years of the PS5's life, combined with the pandemic problems...
Now they're paying up for it, and they'll continue to do so for a good while longer, until new 1st party games can be released, valid for VR too...
Throwing everything they had into what ended up to be 2-3 years of lost investments, is not gonna be easy to recover. Money they will regain, but "lost time" doesn't have an quick&easy fix.
1st party studios are working to recover, but the same time interval has to pass until they're finally able to get the new titles out. And this is exactly where we find ourselves now, quite obvious from the drought of new 1st party releases, and Sony's own teams hard at work expecting to release new titles by 2026 or beyond...

I'd say this huge "stain" won't wash until PS6 release, until those 2-3 years that were lost can be recouped... we'll see.

@Bamila That is a bad thing?

@thefourfoldroot1 What's it like for people with specs though or contact lenses, does it work?

VR always seemed like a PC thing. A range of software and tools, rather than just games, is where the appeal probably comes in for the majority of the audience.

VR games are good, but I don't think VR is intended for games exclusively.

@Jayslow I know people don't like Meta (I don't either), but the Quest 3 at least has a compelling lineup of exclusives, unlike the PSVR2.

The exclusive games on the PSVR1 were way better.

@PinderSchloss If I could get a competent VR headset for $200 in the same way that I can get a Series S or a Switch for $200, I would be interested

Personally I love VR… I picked mine up about a year ago, and still love jumping into it very regularly. I totally get it’s not for everyone and being honest, it’s always going to be a slightly niche side of gaming… but that’s fine!

For me, without sounding cliche, it’s been like rediscovering games again. I’ve been so used to how games play, the format… even the controls of games, and VR has flipped all of that on its head (no pun intended), and even though I suck at most of them still a year in (I still panic reloading weapons during shooting games 😄), I just love having a new way to play and experience them, and at times it can be genuinely exciting / shocking / scary (I’m a big horror fan and even still I get a little nervous in certain horror games).

While I do wish Sony would support it more with first party titles, they clearly are pouring some money into it behind the scenes. Games like the Resident Evil series, GT7 and even recently Hitman wouldn’t have worked on VR editions without some incentive, and at this point I can’t imagine sales are it 😄.

I’m remaining cautiously optimistic, but even if it’s inventive indie and AA titles I have to look forward to from here on out, that’s cool too!

@Jammer
Specs still work. In fact, apparently, it’s the best of all the major headsets for spec space due to the halo and telescopic design. I was just careful because I scratched my PSVR1 day one with my glasses and it was a constant if minor annoyance for years. Contacts would be perfect but I couldn’t be arsed with that hassle. So the lense inserts were an easy (and much cheaper) solution

@Questionable_Duck
lol, just spend an extra couple of hundred. Much more worthwhile than yet another flatscreen box with reskinned games of what you can play already.

I have motion sickness issues, even with FPS games on the TV so VR isn’t for me. My only passing time with it was LABO VR, which was a short experience that was impressive and allowed me to take the headset away from my face, but was not going to replace TV gaming an RPG for me.

I think that’s the real thing about VR; it’s an experience, not a full time way to game or watch Telly.

PSVR2 - alongside this the PS Vita looked like a storming success.
I know that the controls were different but the lack of backwards compatibility seemed like a major misstep - especially given something so niche.

@Bamila One of the main reasons why I don't want VR. I have a huge 4K TV and that's enough emersion for me. I'll also probably get addicted to VR and it will ruin the fun of playing games any other way.

@Bamila isn't this the point of video games, movies, books ?

Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Very much so as it's not part of sony's business strategy planning involving Hideaki Nishino and Herman.

Very strange article. The expensive part is to get something ported to a platform, the extra maintenance cost cannot be so enormous. In particular it cannot be that much of work to put a new song pack on an additional platform (assuming that there is no significant fee attached to update a game). Even a few sales on new song packs would just be free money. Thus, to me to stop support feels more like a decision not to support a competing platform.

It was surprising that beat saber made it to psvr2 at all, I am pretty sure this was not because meta thought that psvr2 would be a good place to recoup some the billions they invested into VR. Maybe they did this to get some idea of the engagement and now they know enough.

Anyway psvr2 is a great improvement over psvr1, has now a very reasonable price, there are plenty of very good games, there is a continuous influx of new games, and the majority of them are of quite good quality.

VR is a case where tech is telling audiences what they want instead of listening to what the audiences actually want. Just like 3D TVs, or curved ones, or the Kinect, or smart glasses. None of that is natural demand and none of them actually adds decent value to the existing experiences. The former two things in particular felt like a way to justify raising costs on items to increase profits.

The only reason I didn't get it is the fact that it's not wireless.

@thefourfoldroot1 Most VR games are "reskinned" in the same way that flatscreen games are "reskinned."

I still love my PSVR2 and when I'm not using it with VR games, I also play my flat games with it too, which adds an additional dimension of immersion, bringing you up close and personal with the games themselves and that's also an added bonus I think not well publicised or overlooked?

I own the PSVR2 (got it on launch) and a Quest 3 (got in November last year) and I have to say that the PSVR2 is so much better than the Quest 3 in every aspect (comfortability, controllers, visuals, battery life ((because it's wired)), haptics) except 2 - those being portability and game support.

If a game is released on both then it's a no brainer to pick it up on my PSVR2, but the Quest 3 simply has more games. The whole reason I bought it was to play the exlusives (Arkham Shadow and AC Nexus) plus modded Beat Saber.

@Questionable_Duck oh Facebook as a company (I still refuse to call them Meta) are straight up evil. But if they are still willing to lose billions of dollars propping up the Quest 3 more power to us.

Also PSVR1 had my favorite launch lineup of all time. Full stop.

Gosh, a gaming accessory that costs nearly as much as the PS5 itself and isn’t backwards compatible with any PSVR1 games isn’t a success?

I am shocked, SHOCKED I say.

It was dead before it even launched.

It’s worth it for Gran Turismo alone

It's a shame, really. I never got myself one but always wanted to. It's just that it's really expensive. Even 50% off it still isn't cheap. I'll get on eventually

Biggest waste of money ever. Literally sits there. Id use it as a screen to watch a film but they never even bothered putting a proper cinema mode on it. Lacks games though GT is good
Pointless now
Worthless

Beat Saber isn't a loss tbh, I really don't get why you'd want to play a poor man's Guitar Hero. However, lack of support can't be denied and growth isn't on the table. The user base will likely shrink as time goes on from here.

@Styledvinny79 but how do you reeeeeally feel about it?

@Questionable_Duck
And yet VR games always feel fresh, like stepping into a new world every release (I do wish many of those worlds weren’t so scary though!)

I got the first PSVR. It made me feel so sick , even hours after . I tried a fan blowing on me, ginger sweets. It just didn't seem worth the sickness. The headset was placed on a skull ornament and gathered dust for years. Even looking at it made me feel queazy. So I gave it away . As a kid I imagined VR being the pinnacle of gaming. Initially I was so disappointed after trying. Then I realized I no longer wanted to be so disconnected from 'reality' . We're probably in the ultimate VR simulator anyway.

@thefourfoldroot1 I agree, but that’s a preference. The adoption via AAA games tells something about the popularity of the platform.

Somehow,I rather suspect that with the middle management changeovers initiated by Jim Ryan & followed along by his successors, with their obsession on live service games, PSVR 2 support rapidly evaporated.

TBF, it sadly reflected a repeat of not only what affected the PSP & Vita,but even the handheld gaming Behemoth Nintendo ultimately found supporting both their 3DS juggernaut & the failed Wii U stretched their first parties too much & played its part with the Switch becoming a reality.

The other parts of the article of costs etc., all quite true. But present day Sony is very much concerned with chasing live service goldmines, (Though in Hermen Hulst's case, missing the point that for every Helldivers II, COD, Fortnite, GTA online, etc.,you also have Minecraft ,Roblox...& other sandboxes that aren't all FPS ....Remember the likes of LBP had a myriad of dlc paid & community driven).

If the rumours are true about the new handheld possibly being made around being like a Playstation "lite" Steam Deck equivalent running your PS5/6 games via lower settings could be a means to avoid tying up resources. Mark Cerny has led a hardware design culture of wanting to make things more developer friendly. As always,time will tell.

My decision is either purchase VR2 or a new receiver for my office. It's sad, that I'm leaning towards the receiver.

As a day one buyer I don't regret it, but definitely a bit disappointed it didn't get more support.
VR was always gonna be a small percentage of my overall gaming time. And there are enough games to meet that need. And I've enjoyed some great VR gaming experiences you just are never gonna get if you are limited to flat screen only. Although it could have been a lot better.

But i will definitely be wary of buying anything day 1 from them in future and will wait and see how it pans out first. Rumoured Sony handheld - day 1 buy anyone?

I think Sony will let the PSVR2 linger until the end of this generation and then exit the VR market.

It was a gimmick even with V1 even Microsoft saw it as one they've now decided to drop it on order to go for Live service even more

I found out with the first VR that it can give me severe motion sickness, in fact back then I only manage to beat the very first Astro Bot game and then I never used it again and sold it when I got my PS5.

Because of this I never even considered the VR2 but the tech always seemed impressive, however the Beat Saber news confirmed that this is indeed another PS Vita, impressive hardware with lots of potential that has been basically abandoned by Sony and slowly by third-party devs too, I don’t see a “VR3” ever happening.

@RoomWithaMoose I'm talking bigger picture than VR. PS5 is the number one game console and that's what they care about. If Quest were even close to matching those numbers, we'd be getting God of War VR, Ghost of Tsushima VR, Astro Bot VR 2... etc. They want that VR peripheral there if they need it, but only if. There's probably a scramble behind the scenes right now to get something comparable to Switch 2 launched ASAP.

My favourite VR titles are Everybody’s Golf VR & GT7 which is just insane on the PRO and I add the PRO in there because of the check box in the options you get that just cleans the image to 4k completely. Stunning VR experience

@IOI I feel Sony only abandoned Vita due to the pathetic sales numbers. Dont know if you were in the uk at the time the vita launched but it was during a recession. Never good for a peripheral

It was never going to be mainstream because the entry price was too so it's just not worth the money for Sony to continue

I said it before and I'll say it again. VR was basically 3DTV all over again (anybody remember how that was briefly a thing?). Just some largely gimmicky thing that some tech enthusiasts got hyped on that most people just find to be too impractical and limiting to use regularly.

When I bought PSVR back on the PS4 it's something I only used a few times and it's been collecting dust stored away somewhere ever since. I just didn't really like it, gave me motion sickness too often. Yeah some of the VR stuff was neat to see and experience at first but it didn't take me long to get over that wow factor and then I just never wanted to go back. That and nobody has convinced me that strapping screens right in front of your eyes couldn't be harmful, and even if it isn't I just hate the isolation of using it, I just like being aware of my surroundings and being able to interact with people around me.

Just think about it: Iron Man, Batman, Blood&Truth, Astro, RE7; all getting new updates for PSVR2 compatability.

Then for VR2: Do whatever you can to port Alyx and even though it's really difficult; do something for Arkham Shadow and Deadpool

They really screwed up. I would definetely buy this even it has only had the games I mentioned and I didn't count other good VR2 games yet...

@ShadowRJ You don't have to do any of that with PSVR2 though. Just one USB-C you plug in the front of the PS5. That's it.

I am bummed about this, but then I remember it's frequently 6 months or more between the release of song packs for Beat Saber. It seemed like they didn't want to support it on any platform sometimes.

I bought one to use with my ps5 and pc. On top of the pc titles it works well with emulators for stereoscopic 3D. I've used it to play 3DS (Citra), Gamecube/Wii (Dolphin), and PS3 (RCPS3) games. While the 3DS,GC, and Wii work with all games. The PS3 is only for games that had 3DTV support. To get it running, you need to use Virtual Desktop and you are all set.

VR, in general, is a waste of time and money

I do a lot of sim racing, so actually find myself using it quite often.

Lack of backwards compatibility and price were the two main factors that stopped me tbh. And honestly, these days I forgot it was even there as Sony’s general output is clearly reduced in tougher market conditions. I would have been tempted eventually if the momentum kept going but I just wasn’t in a position to be an early adopter at the time. I’ve still never tried VR and would love to, but from all accounts Meta seems to be the way to go if you can only get one.

PSVR2 owner since day one here.

And I've got to admit that I rarely turn on the machine. Not enough time to play, so when I play, I play something more casual on the TV.

But I remember that Horizon and RE Village (which I discovered for the very first time on this version, in VR) were truly awesome experiences.

I do possess GT7 but every time I try to play it in VR, I get sick. Guess my VR legs are kinda lost, and it's easy to understand why : I just don't play VR enough these times. So it's a circle.

Maybe that's the problem, with VR : it demands dedication. You've got to put some kind of effort into it, even if it's just a mental one.

I think it's a great headset (the Resident Evil games are really impressive, and some other games even more, like the Red Matter ones) but the lack of compatibility with the first one, due to a big change in the technology involved, was a big mistake in my humble opinion.

We should be able to play Astrobot and Wipeout with even better graphics on PSVR2. We should be able to play Skyrim, Star Wars Squadrons, Blood and Truth. You need to retain those people who have built their own library.

Overall, I don't think VR is necessarily dead - it's still a kid's dream, and an impressive technology - but I think the future really lies on autonomous headsets, which have to be affordable and easy to use.

I know my next VR set will be something like that. I'll never buy a PSVR3, if any (but there won't be one, we all know it by now).

I did own the original PSVR but playing it made me feel so ill with most games that I ended up selling it whilst it was still worth something.

That experience obviously put me off the PSVR2 headset but then when they announced the ridiculously high price, any small slither of interest I did have in it ended right there.

With the benefit of hindsight it seems I dodged a bullet and even now a good few years after it released there's probably no more than 2 - 3 games available that might tickle my interest

VR is a fad and a gimmick, that's why

I'm not knocking people that enjoy VR, if that's your thing then more power to you and I hope you get the most out of it but for me personally, I'm not a fan.

I sold mine on months ago, what a waste of money £530 !! Never again will I buy into VR especially from Sony. They have practically left it to die. PSVR1 had better games. The nail in the coffin for me was no Astrobot, even a remaster of rescue mission would of been helpful. But when the new game was launched with no VR support, it was a kick in the teeth. The tech is great just not enough diversity in the games. And yes I've played all the games some rave on about, but they dont justify the price tag. That's why I sold it on, lost money in the process. But by next year it will be dirt cheap with suppliers wanting to get rid.

@Bobobiwan couldn't agree more, all the great games from VR1 should of made it to VR 2. What a waste of tech in my opinion, but I certainly won't be buying into VR again especially from Sony!!

@Woods-PS You are right I should have used my omnipotent powers to know that I wouldnt have enjoyed vr very much....... genius

@yoda87960 literally nothing you said is true. Sony making PSVR2 had nothing to do with Meta, and in no way is meta worried about Sony’s failed hardware peripheral. Meta Quest 2&3 outsells PSVR2 10 to 1.

I bought PSVR2 on day 1, and it’s the most disappointing piece of gaming hardware I’ve ever owned. It’s good hardware (aside from the chord), but it’s lack of support led to an early demise.

I like the concept of VR, but there are a few things that I feel hold it back from being an experience that will hit the mainstream hard.

(no particular order)
1) Screen and lens problems, too low resolution, screendoor effects, some screens still use LCDs, fixed focus, too narrow field of view, color fringing, and other issues.

2) Most headsets are still too big and heavy. I think we all want some goggles that are light and comfortable, something that you can put on and forget that you are wearing.

3) Input and output, while many current controllers work decently (especially how moving your arms and hands and grabbing objects and such), I feel that the ways we are moving around/traversing the virtual worlds isn't really great yet.
Moving around in VR using analogue sticks almost makes it feel like you're standing on a Segway or something. There has been lots of research in this area with big rigs, but so far I don't think we have reached a good solution that is affordable and takes up a reasonable amount of space. It needs to be something that the average person can afford and fit neatly in the living room.

4) The games. I think a lot of people were dreaming about big-quality open-world VR games with great graphics, that you can lose yourself in and feel like you're living in, and we're just not there yet. I know Skyrim VR was a thing, but it lacked in the other points that I already mentioned. There is also No Man’s Sky, but it's such a lonely experience. I tried it on the PSVR2, but it just doesn't resonate with me. Most VR games are linear experiences or some sort of smaller experience or sports experience.

5) Many headsets are still quite expensive for a lot of people.

Conclusion: I think that VR has the potential to become the most popular way to play games in the future, but there are a lot of breakthroughs that need to happen in the technology department before that vision can be fully realized.
Only then can I see it being a massive mainstream hit.

Also, I would really like to see screen and sensor technology that allows your eyes to naturally focus like they can in the real world.
My eyes tend to feel a bit tired after a longer VR session because they are forced to focus in ways that are not really natural in real life. I know there's research in this area, so it may be commonplace in the future. Let’s wait and see.

That being said, I remain optimistic about VR in general, even if my PSVR2 is currently in a box gathering dust.

For PSVR2 or PS Vita it has it's audience, those that keep supporting it will regardless of their tastes. It is a platform that exists and because PSVR is PS5 it will have it's production or relevance until PS5 is over of support into PS6 gen.

Even if we don't count AR or Smartphones or otherwise VR has to have it's wide screens, it's extra processing, it's bulk, it's expense, because it's so niche, it's building itself up. Like Pocket PCs did, they were niche and only until Steam Deck which is also niche but being more talked about in it's communities then the other 2000/2010s ones did.

VR Hardware is going at fair rates. People can go oh resolution, oh nausea/VR legs but I mean think about it. It's like having a wide monitor strapped to your face. It's got motion that many devs badly use and want to be realistic but the tech isn't designed for that far of 1 to 1, and they want it to be. It's very touchy. I easily understood how realistic or motion gestures worked yet many around me into VR but don't understand motion had no clue why they weren't getting it to work. So motion fans learn it's limits while gamers/devs don't.

VR tech has done so much to advance that no one pays attention to. It's like none gamers do, they think it will be better yet don't understsand what it's able to do.

Games/apps can be anything but the problem is devs are too focused on other consoles/platforms to care to learn it anymore. Their mentality is wrong, their excuses are pathetic and they know the dev time/audience size isn't enough for their predictions so they just don't bother.

Gamers also are too particular on IPs or themes or otherwise, devs won't build up an audience, so we end up in the Samsung Fold/Microsoft Surface Duo side of things were we get barely any support or ideas for them at all.

Sony gave up because they can't be bothered, which is their own fault. Nintendo supported the Wii U, N64, GameCube, Virtual Boy to fair lengths of time. Sony gives up too easily and goes here third parties that cared enough you do something about it.

Major third parties give up as they won't build an audience and go to mobile or Meta headsets instead but those that stick with PSVR2 or Vita will do so till the real end not the 'everyone else has given up' end.

There won't be major releases even if Vita got Borderalnds 2 or Xcom or other Android type ones besides Indies, I think PSVR2 is just Indies or those that are willing to like Skydance did. But otherwise yeah it's a niche audience market.

Sony will keep it around for 10 yearse like Vita did or any other I assume past products till they eventually move on of relevance.

People can say Vita died, but oh it didn't have mainstream games past 2014 or so. Who cares it had games till 2019 or so, before Android Remote Play was the obvious end and an Eshop still open.

But only collectors pay attention to eshops past their next platforms or disk/cart production, while everyone else has moved on. Or know of the PS3/360/Wii, PS2 and others end points of production or eshop access.

@DaniPooo 1.The tech is getting there it is a widescreen monitor strapped to our faces. It will get there. Screen door can vary of how the screen drawing is, or the fitting of it on our heads (besides yes wider screens/headset coverage (as well as glasses or different lens types consideration too yes) I guess that they work with.

The PSVR2 rendering to focus on detail kind of works but only so much to isolate and add detail where need be of eyes focusing on things.

I agree, I see the potential, but yeah some parts we have to wait and see, or audiences need to understand or get their heads behind it. Others it's up to devs laziness, or the money value or otherwise.

I mean many get comfortable, don't care or otherwise or even think about potential they just want it to be magical but don't even have the right expectations for it. Or has to be attractive, fit their lifestyle and so on. I've never cared for any of that at all. I see tech, I have my ideas, but I also understand what it is and it's limits too to be realistic on what it can do, what fiction can be achieved and more.

2.I'd rather them be big and bulky to get the hardware right not be some glasses like fashion accessory. They aren't AR after all. It has to process so much more. I like thick devices anyway, I don't care about slim, easy to snap and break with repair policies that are garbage. No thanks. Slim has never appealed to me in anything. Never cared for the fascination people have with it. Sure for handhelds I get it to fit in pockets but even still. Or whatever attractive looks.

3.Try using Red Steel 2 on Wii, it is still a Wii game of motion tracking sure but 1 versus 2 is immediately obvious.

1 feels like a bad VR game of the modern era trying to over use the motion or segment it, I know as many still have dumb actions in them.

2 is more like a regular game with a mix of buttons/motion that made way more sense to go about things, not segmented areas to do guns/melee, or even combat at all. Segmented as in corridors sure with some wide spaces but still it feels like a small scale Borderlands (besides the 4 weapons, mods and western Ramen vibe to Borderlands wastelands). When the 1st game was a crime western/Japanese type mix but played way worse.

Part 2:
You try motion/stick use, even sticks for like God of War 2005 to 2013 to dodge, Pitfall Lost Expedition (even Wii version I prefer some motions to buttons/sticks and not just for the GameCube inputs I didn't like compared to PS2 ones either) right stick to use items to progress, people don't remember or play them till they go back and go oh this was different to play. Even Knack 1 and 2 did as it was a God of War clone. Try those, try motion of GOOD Wii/Move games even Kinect, you can tell the subtle from those not.

Unless it's twin sticks most game play the exact same for their genres so I find that boring as even the gameplay mechanics are cores of other games copy pasted so to me gameplay is so boring I play old games not because of different inputs but because the cores are more expansive for their ideas then culling it all down to be understood by people and copy paste now.

To me No Mans Sky's PSVR1 controlled better then PSVR2's backstep of over motion use, like the visor or the pulling multi tool off your back is 'cool' but badly tracked. But they like Mojang did with Minecraft PSVR1 with inventory layering in space, were too lazy. So Hello Games also refused to add what even GT Sport/7 did of Dualsense support to key use cases. Because laziness to implement what already worked or was so simple but Hello Games always have bad bugs that return from prior builds because they always seem to do that and it's infuriatingly stupid they never learn what they changed/added between builds, players always noticed.

Star Wars the bounty hunter one or whatever it in VR was garbage, grab to reload was dumb, it barely worked, Red Steel 2 it's a button, never had to think about it. It's probably as comparable to a button on a light gun it's that straight to the point. Red Steel 1 it was awkward to do many actions, 2 always in right place actions not claw grip or otherwise design.

I don't want REALITY when I play a VR game because I know the inputs of motion are badly used to push it's limits of subtle use it is good for to pick up items/turn them can be hit and miss (like many look at this and pick it up items the hit boxes are too small and make me made in all third person games for the past 3 console generations, it is still a problem and no one has learnt, all devs do it and it's hilarious), buttons do it better. Why even bother, standing in place is better then move the camera or headset/arms/hands to this and that. There is a reason i prefer game design/quality of life not reality.

Tricking your brain sure and avoiding nausea without moving your legs or how grounded something is I get that but even still.

I get teleporting or movement isn't as great but even still. It will get there over time.

I do think devs are getting there or yes linear/party game or other types ones but I do think they want to get games out but in doing so waste time/money as they aren't appealing products.

Part 3:
But I think most open worlds are repetitive garbage missions and basic core movesets so to me I refuse to play them.

Sunset Overdrive, Infamous Second Son and Gravity Rush to me made a good mix of moveset based side missions and story missions. Problem is very few offer those so they end up as core moveset/talking and other generic stuff to generic open worlds reflecting real life locations I don't even care about when I can do whatever in a sandbox survival game and not care where I am and altering it.

Sometimes we don't need overly done animations just what games already did best.

The same with game worlds I don't care about reusing Elves/Dwarves for the 100th time (or soicalising methods 100 times console makers/others do that) or other safe character use, I want random ideas in worlds or of character species or level design actions, but devs and players are too comfortable or too grounded restrictive and that random creativity is dead. It has to be easily understood of human movesets, it has to be basic for players to get how to play, for those without an imagination thats too deep. Sigh.

I can't even get games with like a Rayman creativity for example using a fruit as a platform across lava, throwing it as a platform or other uses, everything has to be simple, grounded and easy to understand, we can't have more uses, or rules that are game logic too far, because that's TOO far, everything has to be grounded it's so dumb.

There used to be a walk on the spot in a treadmill way type thing for movement for I guess shooters, but it isn't really a success as it's too far for most people or too 'silly' so this is why we can't have progression is gamers/casuals hold it back but what they think looks stupid. Their fault for why we can't have things expand. People and perception of things have a place but sometimes there are no alternatives and it's their fault.

Even Sony did gloves then gave up on that patent, which annoyed me. PSVR2 or Meta or others have the tracking rings but it isn't enough. I get they want things to be easy or attractive but to me it's just dumb. I get the whole oh don't make it too much of a complicated or unattractive things but I would rather it work then solve that. Not do both at the same time to be attractive. I want functional not attractive.

Part 4:
Some motions are just bad too. They can say oh cockpits are better, yeah but also what do players have to do with it, not a lot. Other gestures push motion like it's evolved that much, it hasn't I can still see the Wii/Move to current motion and it's a step up of actions, but in terms of syncing or understanding play spaces or otherwise no. Devs mis use the tech when a smart devs or player already knows how far it has advanced, so why are they trying to replicate reality so much, just repeat what already worked with the Wii/Move, but oh they didn't work on those so it's all new people learning the making a wheel process, all over again. Which makes me mad. Dumb people.

4.Gamers need to set their expectations straight, we already know how much of a jump PS2 to PS4 open worlds were don't we?

I think for some things it doesn't have to be a cockpit or a joystick to mimic to have use for buttons/sticks, flight sims, racing, etc. even if they translate well to it.

I don't think simulating hands/arms and otherwise needs to be the case and whatever guns, swords, other props are of need either. They can but they don't need to be to 1 to 1.

I mean enough Wii/Move to Kinect in hand versus tracking was enough to tell, even compared to Eye Toy tracking with it's Pom Poms, Sword and others in EU regions for like 1 game each. Or the Basekball dancing on Kinect.

Or people complain about motion when they probably did about analogue sticks or didn't encounter the QTEs or the other games I mentioned ones as people had mostly experienced camera based right stick use or they forget.

So to me expecting open worlds is just a bit much. VR is like PS1/2 again but people are too impatient. I am with many other things but I also set my expectations better.

Part 5:
We have PS1/2 like need to experiment with PSVR1 and 2, but people are so used to non experimenting in PS4/5 games so to me it's just bad because wrong mentality stuff in such an era.

I don't find No Man's Sky that bad, it's a survival game, you can do quests, you can get resources, you can find villages/station stations, even build them. It's not supposed to be an RPG. Anyone who doesn't understand Minecraft or any other ones of a get what you put into it and wants lively RPGs doesn't understand what those games are about. To me they are like having alternate RPGs with the more fun mechanics and not boring lack of inputs RPGs have it's why I prefer survival sandbox games is because RPGs want story and boring corridors, quests and NPCs or combat when any other genre has far more focus on gameplay then an RPG trying to tell a story and have whatever lore but really not level design or character moveset justify it. You can see why I hate modern gaming being more RPG focused and prefer retro too that had more experimentation or gameplay focus too can't you? Besides games got more approachable too and more grounded to appeal to audiences as well compared to how PS3/360 tried to but still had enough PS2 like experimentation left in it.

Even PS2 era design like Tak or any other platformers that did try during that era, had puzzles that made sense of how you approach things using items, animal NPCs and more that felt dynamic enough, even Infamous 1 had a intro scene that's no QTE but might as well be of if you act in 3 seconds or so it will go to one or the other action, very few in that era tried to push other angles of mechanics or dynamic ideas (dynamic can be realistically appealing it's just no one does it for some reason) dynamic doesn't even exist in modern era gaming unless you count survival sandbox games. Those give me do whatever you want then RPG open worlds do still being very safe and 'have options' but are still combat, collect, climb and basic movesets stuff that any game from any era could do that many older games had far superior moveset features not the basics used for the whole game besides a few movesets or skill trees with passive buffs, when older eras had items, had more to their movesets for platforming or other level design related things, but not in a bad way if you like that sort of thing.

Part 6:
5.Depends with that. You had phone ones, you have Meta, you have plenty of others out there besides the main ones, besides store fronts either.

Sure many PC ones, but PSVR or Metas are way cheaper.

People will stand it on a phone (or a plan so it isn't as expensive and up to the security updates stop) or a console or others with enough importance to them. But VR while it does need more power or portable ones are 'underpowered' in the way people see them people don't actually understand what hardware they are using.

Even heads up displays had decent displays in them. But think about it. People can complain about Switch or phones yet they have different hardware to a console, not just in balancing power to battery to otherwise being portable but it's different companies, factories, etc. instructions for the hardware to work. People see tech and go oh it's all the same, it's not. But people don't know the difference either of what a Qualcomm chip and what a AMD CPU is doing at all because they don't care to understand/find out and just go power numbers.

To me the price point is 'fair' for what it is but if you compared to other products you can spend your time and money or on learn yeah it is a thing to get your head around of value for money and learning it and what you can use it with. That and besides people's comforts they fall into.

Also more than a party trick too.

It has potential it's just yeah players buying them, adapting to them, devs having more modes to lean into it more, but at too lazy to spend money on developing for it.

I have so many ideas, it's just money and effort many won't spend time on it and audiences have no confidence in it and I'd say kind of for fair reason but they have to get access to it to understand it.

It took Sony 4 times to get Remote Play to a point of success, at least they didn't give up on it. Audiences don't pay attention to ( They don't have to either) of company's products/projects over the years like others that look at the history, collect, etc that do. So many companies may give up or gamers go but why this and that when a lot of it is easy enough to answer even without being an engineer, on a surface level, besides all the indepth, it's just the surface is easier to understand then people think.

My PSVR1, 2 and HTC Vive Cosmo I think it is, is also gathering dust as well.

@yoda87960 PSVR has been around since PS3 era of prototyping and just happened to take till PS4 to be more effective at achieving it, I don't know if it was even an idea even before Occulus prototypes were being a thing around 2012 era. I mean Sega and Atari had theirs and Sega cancelled there yet it was almost ready back in the 90s.

I mean with enough of remote play, Playlink (smartphone party games and more, even PSVR1 has like Wii U assymetrical use cases, it's probably why Portal is single screen use and not dual screens is they just went with what most people will use it for and ended their dual screen use cases for Portal/PSVR2 like purposes, there is a reason people use a smartphone for a QR code or something and not the YT or any other icons to cast thier content iof they don't know that's a thing let alone casting their phone or another device, people still didn't understand the portal new or old to this stuff and Sony has been doing it since PSP, Vita, PSVR1, Smartphones, and Vita to PS4/PC/PS5/Android/iPhone cut the resolution targeting so to me it's a worse app then it was on Vita for some features but may work better for connecting to other devices. Vita had it exclusively from 2011 to 2019 after all then Android then iPhone in like what 2021 when backbone came out) which Sony had been doing PSP/PS2 to PS3 stuff for years. Sega even did cross save on PS2/PSP with Outrun 2006, Metal Gear Solid did Google Cardboard on PSP.

I think some companies have ideas for years just have to wait to achieve them. Even Nintendo had GBA 3D to DS 3D to 3DS as well as cut GameCube 3D. Some wait for tech to catch up or have the idea/prototypes at whatever stage.

In terms of keeping them in check, maybe, but I'd still say many companies do it to see the tech/ideas they had and success of it sure but enough to still mess around with. Not always direct competition.

I don't see VR headsets as web browsers having their ideas and having to keep up all the time with other requirements.

@MJF With the right ideas sure, the right marketing, the right games, apps, etc. ideas, idea idea, mentality and execution, when many devs approached PSVR1 and 2 as bad as 2006 Wii or like they do of console/PC games and no experimental ideas like a PS1/2 to approach it. That's why I think it fails, mentality and devs not approaching it correctly. We have PS4/5 mentality design in PS1/2 era need to understand hardware again for VR and yet devs are just too stupid.

Audiences finding the price point right or of value sure, the comfort of prior gaming doing it better, refined to it's PS3/360 but cutting away it's experimentation to be what it is of approachable to people seeking story/graphics more or grounded mix of reality familiar and easy to understand gameplay/fictional elements, sure it's done well in it's consistency there.

But many devs/players don't have them. I could say the same about modern gaming being a waste of time due to it's bad game design since old eras more experimental and less copy paste bland oversimplification for audiences or the 'wait till someone is the next trend setter or will willing to try something new while the rest of us play follow the trend/leader. XD

I have a psvr2, brought it fairly recently when the prices started falling, only play gran turismo and it’s an (expensive) addition, I don’t use it all the time, I daily race in flat screen. But the immersion is amazing, second to none,

I really hope I can use it for GT8 or I’ll be annoyed

@SuntannedDuck2 VR is just a garbage experience.
it will never be good.

I was playing mine yesterday, I absolutely love it, some of the best gaming I’ve had over the past 10 years.

Even if PSVR2 died completely right now, I still have enough quality games to play. Even the PSVR still has an amazing library that I still go back to.

Got a Quest 3 too, that’s a decent bit of kit as well.

The price always scared me off. I bought a Meta Quest 3 520mb headset which was cheaper, great Headset but like the PSVR/2 it feels like entry level VR. Meta are already talking about Quest 4 so that's where their priorities lie probably.

I do use it on a fairly regular basis, but on my PC - the choice and quality of game is just better on that platform.

Though I did like HZD:CotM and Arizona Sunshine they can't compete with products like Half Life Alyx.

@MJF fair enough, enjoy what you enjoy.

@johncalmc fair I considered this for games but hardware to me no matter how bad and interesting I would support if can as if it released and wasn't cancelled it had some things there to experience.

To me games that flip I get cheap as my 1 sale won't change anything, but hardware I take differently.

But I get 2hat you mean.

To me if hardware has 1 to 10 games even 100, I am still there as it has enough to it to use it.

To Mr Vita/Wii U may or may not have met their potential but I still had plenty ty of Indies to get on them or virtual co sole/PS1/PSP on there. But that's just me big IPs don't matter to me if other experiences are still good.

No matter how eh failed consoles are I still see something in them.

@Satansblade81 I'm not saying it's a real competitor to the Quest at all. The only earthly reason I can think of as to why Sony would bother with investing in it is in case VR as a market took off into the mainstream (be it Meta, PC, Steam, Switch, whatever). As far as I know, it has not, so Sony has a fairly high quality product they don't know what to do with. A very real "good money after bad" scenario. The PSVR2 is built for multimillion dollar budgeted AAA games of which there just isn't a real market for on VR (besides us). Might as well make a PS5 adaptation of Kevin Costner's Waterworld.

Also, congratulations on never having purchased a Wii U

@SuntannedDuck2 I wasn't talking about what I enjoy - I was talking about the quality of VR.
VR is an absolute trash experience.

three experience's that have revolutionized this hobby for me in my 40 years of playing games. Playing PSVR2 is one of them.

I think they made a huge mistake by not making PSVR titles playable with the PSVR2, and leaving it entirely up to the devs to find a solution on their own for their titles.

I would wager that a substantial portion of PSVR owners that moved on to the PS5 and were waiting for the PSVR2 were turned off by the fact none of their PSVR games would work and they'd have to re-buy all of them, if a PSVR2 version was even made available. The PSVR had far greater dev support and a more robust library than the PSVR2 has achieved.

PSVR was already a niche product, and by not supporting backwards compatibility with the PSVR2 and guaranteeing a substantial reinvestment in software alongside a steep entry cost for the hardware, Sony alienated some of their most dedicated customers and greatly eroded its potential user base.

I know personally, if it was backwards compatible, I would have bought it day one and was ready to, despite the price. I was chomping at the bit for the PSVR2 but the lack of backwards compatibility totally killed it for me, and the library of PSVR2 titles isn't compelling enough for me to buy one, even at the recent substantial sale prices. I could use it for PCVR I suppose, but I already have a Quest 3.

My PSVR2 still works with more than 50 games, another pathetic headline about VR2 from Pushsquare.

@MJF Fair enough. I won't question any further.

@gonzilla I don't know how Sony went about APIs and more, but if like PS3 and overcoming it no idea (even if not completely comparable). I'd love back compat but it's not a typical back compat situation.

Try fitting old light tracking and inside out tracking on the same headset, or both touch screen methods of finger/stylus (besides other details of multi touch or other factors) try it, tell me why engineering wise (aka people should think how that works before making 'I want this to work' claims they haven't actually thought about yet) that wouldn't work, not just for cost, but space on the headset itself and also practical use, or turning on or off each tracking system.

It's not like an adaptor or a chip the way a Master System to Genesis is or Atari 2600/7800 or PS1 to 3/GameCube to Wii U kind of on hardware thing.

It's like a CRT TV to LCD thing with light guns. It's why Wiimotes were so good, candles/LED you don't need a CRT really but it continued that stuff for a bit or Move in a way too.

Then again Nintendo added a Wii turn on and off in Wii U and people still complain. That's full support right there. People that go oh games will magically be reprogrammed when on the disk it's printed with the Wiimote and not a controller. Like people need to understand how tech works.

But I mean, everyone who pays attention to VR knows how tracking tech was going not just prices, but like anything people into gaming don't look to tech just gaming, so a lot of information is clear, they just don't look for it or compare it to get the answers they are looking for.

Anyone complaining about it thinking oh it will have light & camera tracking bases forever clearly like anything else that has changed from AV to HDMI or anything else isn't thinking or looking around at the obvious answers. They couldn't just repurpose and use Move/PSVR1 solutions forever.

If people want better tracking they had to change it, they already used it to it's limits. It's not always company deals or pricing, it's that they can't achieve more. So engineers think up other solutions to make things have all these other benefits to them.

From marketing to technology to redesigned artwork.

That or how games base off Meta and scale up as well. Same with DS to PSP ports, or any other examples.

Companies don't do it to tell customers to upgrade for money (not all the time) it's because they know it's a better hardware moving forward & we keep using HDMI/anything else consistently too right? Not always, but can be.

Sometimes sure it's not money viable, but if they offered PSVR1 adaptors on PS5 early on in it's lifecycle or still do (Sony did), THAT IS SUPPORT. If people missed it that's not Sony's problem.

You wouldn't put both forms of touch screens on a device would you? Why would they do that? That's sort of the question your asking for VR headsets and back compat.

Same point can be made with light/inside out camera tracking. You can't or it's not worth the headache to cram in into a device. So an adaptor for that old one gets added instead. The company still cared.

But that's not good enough for people is it? We can't get an all in one console either can we? Or licensing magically happening for all games either? Some things are out of companies' hands. Other things are more practical to start new on the customers don't get. I hate some things companies do but some things make total sense too. Especially engineering wise.

Part 2:
Back compat to have light tracking versus inside out tracking is not possible. It's like having a CD/DVD/Blu-ray drive or both card slots or thing and that on a console. It's not possible. Built in sure and many of those are back compat but some aren't. Who uses CD on their PS4/5? DVDs/blu-rays sure. CDs, no because Sony doesn't care to let the laser use it. Get an Xbox One with a CD or blu-ray app for that basically. Otherwise a PS3 or 360 really.

Console makers or 3rd party peripheral makers do what they can.

Sony already gave PSVR1 owners an adaptor, what more do they want? It's still usable in back compat that way, Kinect for Xbox 360/One aren't compatible, and Kinect for Xbox One has no port capable on Series S or X either. So Sony did offer people a choice just like any other Wii to Wii U, Switch 1 to Switch 2 (how many are complaining about Switch 1 IR, barely any, I am but that's not many people is it), Dualshock 4 & Dualsense or Xbox One/Series on PS5/Series consoles.

Can't say that's NO SUPPORT for PSVR1 on PS5, it had an adapt, if Sony didn't care they wouldn't have given PSVR1 owners that option, would they? Not everything can be backwards compatible

Seeing people that say oh Labo failed because it didn't have more kits was just dumb too, they had set ideas, they can't keep making it forever? That didn't mean it didn't sell well. They had a few ideas and that's it.

Some people like that are just dumb and can't understand how ideas/engineering works.

There is a reason I think before going this can be a Wii U successor doing this and that is even as not an engineer how sensors and other dual screen tech works. Not just tech magic will solve it.

Optical port? Gone on modern consoles besides what the Xbox One or PS4 of select models, otherwise PS3/360.

Singstar mics for PS2 work on PS3. Buzz Buzzers maybe too.

Like with Remote Play they have done it since PSP, if people weren't into gaming or had no idea, that's not Sony's problem they have tried to market it 4 times now and done the best with it for 'being recognised' but not resolution scaling like PS Vita app did, they took that out which really confused/annoyed me why they did that but whatever.

It's more then Pixel only on Stadia had of restrictions yet not any Laptop/web browser, Sony opened it up or had more then Vita still at the time of PC, now it's both major smartphones and rebranding and all that.

People seem to want upgrades but don't actually factor in how that works. Or seem to go looking at all the ways we see at least that devs have used the hardware. I could tell by Red Steel 2 or Skyward Sword how far the solutions had of IR on a Wiimote let alone the gyro back then.

Let alone other things of dual screens from Dreamcast to Wii U and dual screen smartphones (or Xbox TV TV TV app use or how focal they used single app/game use of processing power on purpose, yet smartphones or Windows can go further then consoles can but they weren't made for that in mind) or things still not achieved.

@SuntannedDuck2 Wow, that's a lot. I work in software and systems, I'm an engineer, I understand how it works and how changing interfaces can be challenging.

It could have been possible. Saying "light tracking to inside out tracking isn't possible because they're different" doesn't fly. Maybe they didn't plan ahead and didn't build the stack out intelligently in a way that allowed the applications to be hardware (tracking method) agnostic, and devs had to build their own method of tracking, granted, but that is very different than saying "not possible because it's different". Saying "people can still use the old hardware" is also missing the point.

Tracking is tracking. The method used for tracking shouldn't matter, as long as position in space is tracked and passed to the application in a standard way. Best example is PCVR, different headsets with inside out and outside in tracking, different controller layouts, etc. generally interchangeable and work with most games, because again the hardware and method shouldn't matter as long as the application gets the needed spatial data, however it's collected.

Maybe it would have been hard, but it would have been possible. I buy the argument that they didn't do it because it'd eat into PSVR2 software sales a lot more, and we all know that software sales generally subsidize hardware costs.

@gonzilla Fair enough, appreciate the clarity.

Well IR and others aren't the same? Can it actually be translated or pick up on, different sensors and things?

CRT/LCD aren't the same. I am only assuming (not an expert obviously) VR light and camera tracking is different technologies. Compared to say 3D tech over the years which has still been similar of stereoscopic.

Sure in software or the principle of tracking sure. Obviously I'm not an engineer and what parts, what methods, etc. would go with.

I thought materials/equipment did matter though? Doesn't it in a sense, with how light or whatever things would work? I don't understand science/engineering enough of course.

In software sure you can customise it to whatever parameters that can suit it.

Very childish behaviour deleting perfectly reasonable and measured comments. No engagement or reply. Can you at least give me the decency of an adult reply as to why you have removed my comments? Is disagreeing with the original thread creator really grounds for removing my comment under the guise of "discussing moderation" ? I respect your right to have a different opinion from mine, that's fine. I would expect the same common courtesy back in a civilised conversation no?

I picked up a PSVR2 on launch and have been impressed with all the experiences leading up to The Midnight Walk and Undead Citadel in recent weeks.

My issue is not with the headset or its ‘support’ but that people in general don’t seem to like VR that much in general. It’s a VR problem and reads like most people would prefer that it were not a product that existed in the Playstation lineup, which I find odd. It's like, if it’s not for you then it’s not for you. You don’t need to have an opinion of it, it’s fine! It’s a niche tech, but for those of us who have engaged with it and its growing library to a legitimate extent it’s amazing! Odd dodgy port aside the machine has had improved versions of Quest games from Max Mustard through Zombieland and then we got best in class versions of No Man’s Sky, Hitman World of Assassination, RE Village, RE4 Remake, paid for by Sony I would add, etc.

People want the headset to just fail. People who don’t then complain about lack of support whilst ignoring what we do have and are getting. Sure I think the headset’s in a lose-lose situation but it’s not down to “lack of support”. It’s VR apathy combined with supposed VR fans ready to complain about what they don’t have yet but ignore what they do.