• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Sony announces PlayStation VR2 and Sense Controllers at CES

bargeparty

Member
They’re under 2 different sections lol. If it has eye based foveated rendering, why did they not say that? It would be a big selling point. They mention eye tracking for user inputs, why wouldn’t they mention eye tracked foveated rendering which is a much bigger deal?

Again - eye tracking inputs and foveated rendering are not one and the same thing. Them both being on a headset doesn’t automatically mean that the headset can do eye tracked foveated rendering.

All I’m after is Sony confirming that it has it or not. They haven’t done that yet.

Bruh...

In my short googling foveated rendering is defined as eye tracked. In cases where it's not, either fixed or dynamic fixed, it's specifically called out.

If foveated rendering is defined as using eye tracking and you state "we support foveated rendering," why would you need to specifically call out that it's eye tracking? It's like a given. If your headset supports it and you don't use it, that's performance left on the table, right? Seems silly.

You're just being a jackass to be a jackass.

Edit: Here's a clumsy way to explain this.

You ask me "what SQL software do you use?"

And I say "SQL Server"

You respond "Oh so, SQL Server Compact"

and I say "No, SQL Server, if I meant Compact I would have said Compact."


Foveated Rendering is eye tracked, anything else is not called "Foveated Rendering" but "Fixed Foveated Rending" or "Dynamic Foveated Rendering."


Ok I'm tired of typing foveated rendering.
 
Last edited:

Loxus

Member
Bruh...

In my short googling foveated rendering is defined as eye tracked. In cases where it's not, either fixed or dynamic fixed, it's specifically called out.

If foveated rendering is defined as using eye tracking and you state "we support foveated rendering," why would you need to specifically call out that it's eye tracking? It's like a given. If your headset supports it and you don't use it, that's performance left on the table, right? Seems silly.

You're just being a jackass to be a jackass.

Edit: Here's a clumsy way to explain this.

You ask me "what SQL software do you use?"

And I say "SQL Server"

You respond "Oh so, SQL Server Compact"

and I say "No, SQL Server, if I meant Compact I would have said Compact."


Foveated Rendering is eye tracked, anything else is not called "Foveated Rendering" but "Fixed Foveated Rending" or "Dynamic Foveated Rendering."


Ok I'm tired of typing foveated rendering.
The funny thing is, there is no such thing as 'eye tracked foveated rendering'.

It's either 'foveated rendering' which utilizes eye tracking by default or 'fixed foveated rendering'.
Foveated rendering is a rendering technique which uses an eye tracker integrated with a virtual reality headset to reduce the rendering workload by greatly reducing the image quality in the peripheral vision (outside of the zone gazed by the fovea).

A less sophisticated variant called fixed foveated rendering doesn't utilise eye tracking and instead assumes a fixed focal point.



'Eye tracked foveated rendering' is a made up name to try to downplay the PS5 capabilities.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
They’re under 2 different sections lol. If it has eye based foveated rendering, why did they not say that? It would be a big selling point. They mention eye tracking for user inputs, why wouldn’t they mention eye tracked foveated rendering which is a much bigger deal?

Again - eye tracking inputs and foveated rendering are not one and the same thing. Them both being on a headset doesn’t automatically mean that the headset can do eye tracked foveated rendering.

All I’m after is Sony confirming that it has it or not. They haven’t done that yet.
Foveated Rendering doesn’t exists without eye tracking… c’mon… it is a tech that uses eye tracking.
 
Last edited:

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
I think vr still needs to be more than 4k in the end, the virtual image is so large it still looks a bit soft vs say watching something in 4k. (Makes sense, if you sit 5ft from a 120" 4k display it won't look as sharp as say a 65" 4k at 5ft). But we just don't have the horsepower yet to run this.

Still would be nice for 2d viewing of non vr content, if you wanted to watch say a 4k movie at virtual 90" at virtual 10ft it would still "look" 4k. Instead it just look 1080p ish now........
 

Rudius

Member
the ones i mentioned are all around 110 degrees. hence why i mentioned them. it's very claustrophobic.
Those devices claim 110 degrees, but are actually smaller. Specifically in the horizontal field of view only the Pimax type devices are wider than 110. Not even the Index reaches it (108), rift and rift s are only 86 degrees horizontally.



Check at 13:48 seconds.




Maybe you have a wider or smaller than normal ipd, like this guy below. In that case adjustable lenses will provide better results.

 
Last edited:

Rudius

Member

This video someone linked here is beautiful. That's exactly what I want for PSVR2: immersive game play and excellent visuals. I play most VR games seated and don't give a damm about running around tetherless. Just give me the highest quality possible for a reasonable price.
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!

This video someone linked here is beautiful. That's exactly what I want for PSVR2: immersive game play and excellent visuals. I play most VR games seated and don't give a damm about running around tetherless. Just give me the highest quality possible for a reasonable price.
This style is at least equally beautiful (in playability, it could also be that visually if made by a big dev like DCS rather than a solo dev). Naturally not every game is a cockpit game where, even if VR controllers offer really cool interactions, standard (or custom genre) controllers also make sense.

That's why it was big news when MSFS, which already supported VR headsets, also added support for VR controllers. It's not as intuitive as the above game with its made for VR cockpits as real cockpits are much more dense so they use point & click style for bits and bobs but still great.

You can play almost all full VR games seated still, but also get awesome immersion and interactions where you actually, at their most basic, aim and shoot a gun combining the best of lightgun games, if not taking that to the next level in 3D space, with the known intuitive free roaming of FPS.
 
Last edited:

Rudius

Member
From Ars Technica :

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2022/01/sony-confirms-playstation-2-vrs-specs-first-official-game/

"Eye tracking, meanwhile, is advertised primarily as a form of control, so that in-game elements like characters can respond directly to a user's gaze.

But Sony also mentions the technical benefits that eye tracking can bring, as part of a system known as "foveated rendering." With such a system in place, wherever a user's pupil isn't aimed, a VR system can dynamically add blur and reduce pixel count in a way that natural peripheral vision might not perceive. And with fewer pixels being rendered, VR software can run at the faster frame rates that the standard demands.

Commercial VR headsets have very little in the way of formal foveated rendering systems, with only select HTC headsets employing the feature—and not in a way universally embraced by VR game developers. Having such an efficient standard on a popular platform like PlayStation, on the other hand, will likely accelerate its adoption."

Sony themselves confirmed PSVR 2 will use eye tracking foveated rendering... Of course it will also enable great stuff in gameplay, especially when interacting with characters.
It's good to see confirmation, but the simple fact that is has usable eye tracking automatically enables them to do at least some form of gaze based foveated rendering. The question is only about how precise it can be, or how small the high resolution gaze area can be.

In the worst case scenario we can have something similar to Resident Evil 7 VR: a large circle of clear graphics and only a rim of low resolution in the peripheral vision, but with the clear circle moving if you look at the edges.

In the best case scenario, a very precise and fast tracking would allow for a very small high resolution circle, thus saving a lot of performance, like demonstrated in the Oculus Conect events

My guess is that we will have a less precise version for now, since it's the first generation, but still allowing better performance than the PS5 could provide otherwise.
 

mitchman

Gold Member

This video someone linked here is beautiful. That's exactly what I want for PSVR2: immersive game play and excellent visuals. I play most VR games seated and don't give a damm about running around tetherless. Just give me the highest quality possible for a reasonable price.
DCS in VR is indeed fantastic, but I tend to use TrackIR most of the time as DCS does require some keyboars shortcut input, which is harder to do in DCS.
 

Darius87

Member
I’ve never mentioned “full rdna” but whatever.
never? :messenger_tears_of_joy:
Xbox Series S/X have the full RDNA2 feature set, including hardware to take advantage of it. The PS5 is RDNA2, but is missing some features and hardware to use those features.
What we do know is that it is confirmed to not have hardware support for VRS, which means it is not "full" RDNA2. If that's an actual issue is debatable, but it is true, and you should probably stop arguing.

I’ll make it simple for you - nowhere have Sony confirmed eye-tracking based foveated rendering. The ps blog they just made to announce all the specs made no mention of it, or in fact any mention of foveated rendering.

Do you understand?

Eye tracking != eye tracked foveated rendering.

When Sony confirm it has eye based foveated rendering, rather than an article just saying “they told me it can do it “, that’s when it’s case closed.

I don’t know why you guys are getting so angry - I’m not saying it can’t do it. I’m saying we don’t know yet because it hasn’t been confirmed, and their presentation doesn’t list it while specifically mentioning other uses for the eye tracking.
i just want to know why you add full to any feature to make it look better then what ps has?
1) sony mentioned foveated rendering in visual fidelity paragraph do you think eye tracking is also related to visual fidelity?
2) do you think sony would just add eye tracking for inputs? but also add static foveated rendering?
3) do you think geometry engine patents are false? because there's explanation how fv rendering works and mentions gaze tracking in pipeline.
4) do you think J. Ryan should have done road to PSVR2 to explain to you about eye tracked fv rendering?
5) do you think arstechnica is lying with saying:
But Sony also mentions the technical benefits that eye tracking can bring, as part of a system known as "foveated rendering."
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
It's good to see confirmation, but the simple fact that is has usable eye tracking automatically enables them to do at least some form of gaze based foveated rendering.
Nope. DecaGear also touted eye tracking but only for gameplay and avatar expressions, disappointing (maybe delays and changes will add this if it's ever made). You need it to be super precise/super high hz for foveated rendering to keep up and not have the quality variation visible in any of the tiny split seconds your gaze takes to move. The presentation didn't explicitly state eye tracking and derived from it (dynamic) foveated rendering if only to be clear about it since they may not be mentioning a name few are familiar with anyway (if you want to accept dynamic foveated is called just foveated and static is the one that needs the extra word officially) but just the words, hence my first comment here. It's great to have, it's what my mind thinks whenever eye tracking is mentioned, it most likely means that they do have this, but clarification is necessary just in case.
Hope it works on PC if it's affordable and the inside out tracking is on par (I dunno why the controllers include motion sensors etc., I guess it's for when they go out of the HMD's view?).

Edit: the HMD itself also has all kinds of sensors within, I don't get that, the inside out tracking is enough even in the worst VR kits to track the head position/movement at all times 🤷‍♂️

Also hope the eye tracking is fast enough for dynamic foveated rendering not just expressions/gameplay related stuff (DecaGear so disappointed me with hinting it's only for the latter).

Edit again: so apparently pretty much every VR HMD does include sensors like that & they're needed because camera tracking isn't fast enough while the sensors go @ like 1000hz 🔥
 
Last edited:
It almost assuredly uses display port alt mode to increase bandwidth over 30 gbps like what virtual link was suppose to do. 10 gbps is not enough bandwidth for VR unless compression is being used. The ps5 would have to encode to hevc and the headset would have to then decode it. I don’t think Sony is using this method otherwise wifi 6 would easily suffice for wireless play and Sony was toying with a patent for hgig which isn’t needed unless you’re going for raw high bandwidth signal.

You are spot on. I dunno what the hell I was thinking with my original message. Of course it'll use alt mode DP.
 
They probably will at some point. PS5's WiFi6 is 9.6Gbps vs USB-C's 10Gbps, so it's within grasp. They will probably reveal that later, since the primary connection is through the USB-C cable.

This isn't the case. Wi-Fi 6's max theoretical speed is 9.6 Gbps.

The PS5 radio supports a max bandwidth of 80MHz bandwidth, 1024 QAM and 2x2 MIMO. This gives a theoretical max speed of 1.2Gbps. You'd need a 4x4 MIMO setup with a bandwidth of 320 MHz to reach 9.6 Gbps.
 

Rudius

Member
For me, it comes down to pricing and simplicity of setup.
Although I don't like wired setup - at least 1 wire (hopefully it's lightweight/flexible & perhaps replaceable) is much more manageable than the original PSVR setup, which was rather nightmarish.
I hope that I don't have to setup the PS camera like the first VR.

And pricing... I am hoping $199 or less on a good sale. $299 would be a good starting point, but not more than that... especially it's main competition is basically the super popular Quest2.

..and hope the setup would be compatible with PC one way or another... although I guess it's pretty much given that someone will figure out a way to run it on a PC, but actual official PC connectivity support would be nice.
If you want that low of a price you will have to wait a few years to buy one. In my opinion it is a better deal to buy early and enjoy the device for years rather than saving 100 or 200 dollars.
 

Rudius

Member
There’s only 1 mention of foveated rendering on there, and it makes no mention of eye tracking. In fact there’s a separate eye tracking feature listed there and nothing about foveated rendering in it?

Again, because some people still don’t seem to get it - foveated rendering != eye tracking. The Oculus Quest 2 has foveated rendering too, but not eye tracked foveated rendering. Sony have not confirmed that their headset has eye tracked foveated rendering yet. It absolutely could have it, it would just be nice for some actual official confirmation.
Why would they mention foveated rendering at all if it is not dynamic using eye tracking? Fixed foveated rendering (already possible on PSVR1) is a detriment to the experience since it makes the image perceptibly worse, it's not something to brag about in a paragraph about "a high-fidelity visual experience".
 

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
If people's complaints about wireless and whatever goal post you want to move are going to be issues then clearly this thing isn't for you.

For the rest of us who either have a great headset already (Index) or those who want to get in on something great and more affordable (PSVR2) then it will be a glorious time.

There's always some who have little to no interest yet they keep popping their heads in to express themselves. It's fair but when that's all you do then it shows your colors.

That's why I'd there's a thread that bothers me I just stay out.
 
From Ars Technica :

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2022/01/sony-confirms-playstation-2-vrs-specs-first-official-game/

"Eye tracking, meanwhile, is advertised primarily as a form of control, so that in-game elements like characters can respond directly to a user's gaze.

But Sony also mentions the technical benefits that eye tracking can bring, as part of a system known as "foveated rendering." With such a system in place, wherever a user's pupil isn't aimed, a VR system can dynamically add blur and reduce pixel count in a way that natural peripheral vision might not perceive. And with fewer pixels being rendered, VR software can run at the faster frame rates that the standard demands.

Commercial VR headsets have very little in the way of formal foveated rendering systems, with only select HTC headsets employing the feature—and not in a way universally embraced by VR game developers. Having such an efficient standard on a popular platform like PlayStation, on the other hand, will likely accelerate its adoption."

Sony themselves confirmed PSVR 2 will use eye tracking foveated rendering... Of course it will also enable great stuff in gameplay, especially when interacting with characters.

Nice to see the record set straight.

Sad to see the more delusional posters still trying to argue this isn't a confirmation. It's become a bad joke at this point. I've made a report to the mods because this thread is clearly being derailed by people who only want to spread FUD and troll bait the good folks here and not engage with the thread topic discussion in good faith.
 
Last edited:

yurinka

Member
Yeah, john carmack mentioned before that HDR was useless with current Fresnel technology because the higher luminance of HDR would make glare and rays unbearable.
I have a huge respect for John Carmack regarding game and engine programming, but regarding displays Sony has way more experience, knowledge and tradition than him. I'm pretty sure they will do a great job and know what they are doing.

And well, the overall engineering team behind the PlayStation hardware. Before they did it, it was hard to believe that base PS4 was going to handle VR games, that PS4 Pro was going to run 4K games without a simple rescaling (did a great job with the checkerboard, and some even had native 4K), or that PS5 was going to match the performance of Series X and even surpass it a bit in some games, and that it was going to feature hardware accelerated raytracing. Or that PSVR was going to work as well as it does with the hardware it had. Same with Vita or PSP.

Question for anyone who has experienced VR first-hand... is it possible to experience vertigo from a VR game if you have a phobia of heights?
Yes. When playing on a flat tv, you have more sense that the game is 'fake'. But the level of inmersion in VR is way higher and different, it's hard to explain it: you feel that you are inside of the game because the framerate is so smooth and the camera movements match your head movements. It is super awesome and special, you feel like you're inside the world of the game.

So you can feel vertigo, or things like feeling that your personal space is invaded when other character gets too close to you and things like that. Specially the first times you play it, until you get used to it and learn 'it's fake'. As you keep using it you experience it less.
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
Sims are amazing in VR, racing, flight, space.

One that comes to mind that got me to try VR on Oculus DK1 was this (very old, low res captured, but the feels are there). Elite dangerous was my first VR experience. I can't even explain how otherworldly it is to see planets to scale, it's almost a spiritual experience, and Space engine is also a MUST.


Dirt 1 & 2 are fucking scary in VR


DCS is another must for flight sims


These are games where you sit and don't mind a cable. Sony would have a market to sell units on PC if they allowed PCVR.


No other affordable device can translate scale like VR. TVs can't come close.
I agree about elite dangerous, that was a gaming experience ill never forget. I was there for n64 and the emergence of pc gaming but nothing comes close to playing VR on a rig as intended. People play all these bullshit party games and think they get it. Just no. As good as VR does casual, it does sims even better.
 

RJMacready73

Gold Member
Question for anyone who has experienced VR first-hand... is it possible to experience vertigo from a VR game if you have a phobia of heights?
One of the first things I did with Skyrim VR is head up the nearest mountain, walk over to the edge then look down and you definitely get that Oooo shit I'm up high af feeling... Then I leapt off and my brain had an instant stroke and told my stomach to heave, was great fun if unpleasant so yeah you'll feel the heights
 

Punished Miku

Gold Member
Question for anyone who has experienced VR first-hand... is it possible to experience vertigo from a VR game if you have a phobia of heights?
It's less than the real thing, but 100% yes it exists. They have lots of videos of roller coasters and things. Some short games have you walk on a plank over a skyscraper and your floor below you looks like an endless chasm.
 
Those devices claim 110 degrees, but are actually smaller. Specifically in the horizontal field of view only the Pimax type devices are wider than 110. Not even the Index reaches it (108), rift and rift s are only 86 degrees horizontally.



Check at 13:48 seconds.




Maybe you have a wider or smaller than normal ipd, like this guy below. In that case adjustable lenses will provide better results.

good call. i did see Pimax is 170 fov horizontal though. but yes, most headsets round up, etc. my ipd is 64. standard. i'm not saying 110 is bad. and who's to say psvr2 isn't exaggerating amiright? i'm just saying it's a far way off from being truly immersive. that's why after the initial "whoa vr!" people eventually put it away as a cool toy to show their friends every once and a while. OF COURSE there are the exceptions with people that love everything VR, but i have 3 headsets sitting around here collecting dust. tried to sell them on fb marketplace, ebay, craigslist. dropped the price down to $50 and still no takers. literally gave a vive cosmos to a friend for free. if this stuff were so immersive and incredible, i'd imagine they'd be a hot commodity (especially in our chip shortage/supply chain times). they're just not. oculus quest 2 is priced and marketed perfectly. that's why it's selling great. but as far as immersive, true what we like to imagine VR, gaming, we're still a ways off. and in my opinion, it has a TON to do with FOV.
 
Looks like it will be awesome.

It was always going to have a wire. They've said that since the beginning. The wire is of less concern to me than fps, resolution, field of view, eye tracking, all the things that make it look better and eliminate motion sickness.

It will cost $599, come with controllers, and come bundled with a digital PS5 for $999. These will not be sitting on shelves unsold at this price. Good luck finding one, if you don't preorder. Maybe a price drop in a few years.

Most PSVR1 games that are worth a shit will get an update and work on PSVR2.

I'm in.
 

Turk1993

Member
This with GT7
 

Tygeezy

Member
I have a huge respect for John Carmack regarding game and engine programming, but regarding displays Sony has way more experience, knowledge and tradition than him. I'm pretty sure they will do a great job and know what they are doing.

And well, the overall engineering team behind the PlayStation hardware. Before they did it, it was hard to believe that base PS4 was going to handle VR games, that PS4 Pro was going to run 4K games without a simple rescaling (did a great job with the checkerboard, and some even had native 4K), or that PS5 was going to match the performance of Series X and even surpass it a bit in some games, and that it was going to feature hardware accelerated raytracing. Or that PSVR was going to work as well as it does with the hardware it had. Same with Vita or PSP.


Yes. When playing on a flat tv, you have more sense that the game is 'fake'. But the level of inmersion in VR is way higher and different, it's hard to explain it: you feel that you are inside of the game because the framerate is so smooth and the camera movements match your head movements. It is super awesome and special, you feel like you're inside the world of the game.

So you can feel vertigo, or things like feeling that your personal space is invaded when other character gets too close to you and things like that. Specially the first times you play it, until you get used to it and learn 'it's fake'. As you keep using it you experience it less.
There is a patent out there by sony for fresnel manufacturing that discusses the suppression of the lens flare. Sony was obviously aware of this and have looked to correct it. When Carmack made those comments it was 100 % correct.

 

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
Hopefully they can sell it for like 249 gbp. I think that would be the sweet spot. I think it should be achievable if a quest 2 is 299 with dedicated hardware inside. I’ll be in day one if it’s 249 or even 279-299.

I should probably sell my psVR. I hope psvr 2 is back compat with psvr titles as I have ashit ton.
 

SilentUser

Member
I highly doubt this, but people are stating this person is credible







I'm beyond hyped! Q2 would make sense somehow, considering how soon Sony first talked about PSVR2 and it's controller, but I think it is most likely going to be by it's end (june?) if the rumour is correct. Also, new event coming really soon :messenger_smiling_hearts: :messenger_smiling_hearts: :messenger_smiling_hearts:
 

Tygeezy

Member
I'm hoping all games will be playable bare minimum on a big virtual screen environment within the headset. That becomes a good selling point because it can also be marketed as a tv and be adopted at a higher rate. You could take your ps5 and put it anywhere where there is a power outlet and just plug your headset into the usb-c port.
 

lachesis

Member
If you want that low of a price you will have to wait a few years to buy one. In my opinion it is a better deal to buy early and enjoy the device for years rather than saving 100 or 200 dollars.
I'm afraid I would then have to wait a bit. (Of course, would have to see the actual price)
I bought PSVR1 bundle at $199 after a few years, but honestly it felt "dated", because I was buying it a few year old tech - so I get what you mean. Buy early, and enjoy longer.

At $299, I may think about getting it right away, if it does offer excellent bc of handful VR games that I have, and official pc connectivity to boot...
but at $399 or higher, I would wait for price drop, or at least wait and see what's in store for Quest 3 before deciding.

It would be interesting how Sony would position themselves on this VR market this time around.... If they would align themselves with highend PC VR, or mainstream ones like Quest 2, or trying to cut their own market with slew of exclusives?
 

Kerotan

Member
Quest 2 has crappy display.

PSVR2 wins in every category:
OLED vs LCD (blacks, haloing)
Higher resolution
Much wider FOV
Foveated rendering
Hardware adjustable IPD
Haptics/ergonomics/controllers...

Quest is not even close to PSVR2
This is basically a dream come true.

I remember before ps5 announcement people said psvr2 should launch day 1 and I always said they should wait at least 1 year if not 2. Bigger ps5 install base but more importantly the chance of a bigger jump over psvr 1.
 

yurinka

Member
There is a patent out there by sony for fresnel manufacturing that discusses the suppression of the lens flare. Sony was obviously aware of this and have looked to correct it. When Carmack made those comments it was 100 % correct.

Yep, the folks Sony has engineering their gaming hardware and displays are top tier. They make great displays and know how to get the best from the gaming hardware they build.

So very likely, as happened with PSP, PS Vita, PS4, PS4 Pro, PS5 or PSVR, PlayStation VR2 will look and perform way better than the raw specs lead us to think. It's difficult to find people with more knowledge, talent and experience than them.

Obviously won't be perfect, but as usual with PSVR2 they will solve not only widely known issues, but also some issues only a few ones -or almost nobody else- noticed.

This is basically a dream come true.

I remember before ps5 announcement people said psvr2 should launch day 1 and I always said they should wait at least 1 year if not 2. Bigger ps5 install base but more importantly the chance of a bigger jump over psvr 1.
In fact considering how covid delayed the development of games and constrained the production and shipment of chips and consoles, I think they may be thinking on a 2023 PSVR2 release.

We basically got the name, the controller, its raw specs and what seems to be a short in-engine cutscene of the first announced game, which makes me think they we're pretty far from the release. They may wait for multiple future big events -one of them I assume being E3- to announce the price, release date, appearance of the headset and to announce and show several lunch window games.

If we're lucky we'll get it at the end of this year, but I think it's more likely that we'll get it during 2023.
 
Last edited:

Kev Kev

Gold Member
One of the first things I did with Skyrim VR is head up the nearest mountain, walk over to the edge then look down and you definitely get that Oooo shit I'm up high af feeling... Then I leapt off and my brain had an instant stroke and told my stomach to heave, was great fun if unpleasant so yeah you'll feel the heights
riding the waterfalls like im at a water park is one of my favorite things to do in skyrim VR. im always in search of the next highest cliff to jump off of too. of course i can always just load up no mans sky and fly around in a space ship and get that same feeling. but yeah i love that feeling in my stomach. feels like im on a rollercoaster and i can make it happen in my living room. the future is pretty fucking rad
 
Top Bottom