Sony ‘Testing’ PS VR2 For PC Use

Sony ‘Testing’ PS VR2 For PC Use RD.jpg
If the move is made, it could see the headset, which is revelatory for Gran Turismo 7 players, be used for further driving titles.

Images: Sony

Sony’s PlayStation 5-exclusive PS VR2 headset could be opened up, with the console giant teasing possible PC compatibility.

Following the Japanese company’s recent exploits porting older games to Steam, and in the case of Helldivers 2 at the same time as the PS5 launch, some of the PlayStation-focused hardware could become multi-platform too.

PlayStation VR2 headset and Sense controllers


The news follows a PlayStation Blog post which announced new (non-driving) games headed to the headset.

“We’re pleased to share that we are currently testing the ability for PS VR2 players to access additional games on PC to offer even more game variety in addition to the PS VR2 titles available through PS5,” reads the statement.

“We hope to make this support available in 2024, so stay tuned for more updates.”

While this is not confirmation, Sony tends not to go on record unless it is a tactical heads-up.

The second virtual reality headset from PlayStation launched in February 2023, ditching the combination of LED lights, Move controllers and an external camera for tracking used in the original. Instead, it utilises the more traditional headset camera set-up combined with new Sense controllers or a Dualsense gamepad.

Gran Turismo 7 PS VR2
Gran Turismo 7, using PS VR2

Inside, it makes use of eye-tracking to implement foveated rendering, in theory optimising performance by prioritising what you are looking at. OLED screens are also used, running at a 2000 x 2040 resolution per eye.

It is currently priced at £529/€599.99/$549.99 and connects to a PS5 via a single USB Type-C cable. Close rivals include the Meta Quest 2 and 3.

The pre-eminent driving experience compatible with PS VR2 to date is Gran Turismo 7. It supports the headset, following a free update, across all game modes (apart from local split-screen multiplayer) including ranked online racing and all single-player career components.

Would you welcome a VR headset that works across both the PS5 and PC? Let us know in the comments below.
About author
Thomas Harrison-Lord
A freelance sim racing, motorsport and automotive journalist. Credits include Autosport Magazine, Motorsport.com, RaceDepartment, Overtake, Traxion and TheSixthAxis.

Comments

Premium
From what I've seen, the PSVR2 is a very good headset. I'll probably get one at some point for my PS5. So this is good news for the PC space.

This also looks to me like Sony trying to shore up, recover, and expand any space they lost in their Call of Duty scuffle with Microsoft.
 
Last edited:
Premium
If you don't notice you are lucky, it will save you a ton of money:). But road texture is something that really stands out. Drive Nords and you will see it, or Sebring. Some tracks are more noticeable than others. I think for a lot of people, if you don't have something high end to compare to, won't notice. But stick a Varjo Aero or Pimax Crystal on your eyeballs and there is, sadly, no going back.
It's one of those things, as I mentioned never even thought to look at track textures. First thing I looked at was dark areas, then shadows then opponent cars and the cockpit/text which look great.

I'm just driving LMU on a screen and I've got that at 4k with everything maxed out and I probably wouldn't have even looked at the track textures if we weren't chatting about it now :).

I bought a Quest 3 as a first dabble in VR since the PS VR1. It will eventually get changed out because I like shiny things but until the 5090 or something comes out and you can really take advantage of the high end headsets I'll hold off. At least I know I don't get VR sick anymore the PS VR1 was a nightmare.
 
I don't think they're lying, but it sounds too good to be true. What's the catch? I thought Sony was selling the PSVR2 at a loss and would make it up from software sales in their ecosystem. My best guess is they're going to sell a different variant of the PSVR that is compatible with PCs at a higher price point.
 
D
I don't think they're lying, but it sounds too good to be true. What's the catch? I thought Sony was selling the PSVR2 at a loss and would make it up from software sales in their ecosystem. My best guess is they're going to sell a different variant of the PSVR that is compatible with PCs at a higher price point.
Nobody buying it, that's the issue, they need to recoup at least some money.
 
As a freshly jilted G2 user, I'm very interested in PSVR2 on PC. I (almost) can't believe that Microsoft have dropped such a ginormous dump on WMR users - it's one thing to stop support, but it's completely off to outright brick headsets if you simply want to keep Windows fully updated, all while HP are still selling new G2's!!! Mental.

As for the PSVR2 headset itself, while it's resolution is a small drop from G2, those OLED screens will be a very welcome improvement (G2's blacks are definitely not great), and the superior 40Gbps USB C (compared to Quest 3's USB 3) should be more than capable enough of passing visuals just the same as DisplayPort headsets, as long as you have that connectivity.

Sony are presumably just trying to recoup R&D and manufacturing losses, but expanding to a bigger market-base (which does have a nice gap in the market for PSVR2) will hopefully bring VR more to the fore in terms of increased software / games support, longevity and even possibly diversity, and just give the gaming industry something relatively fresh and new for a much overdue change.
 
Premium
As a freshly jilted G2 user, I'm very interested in PSVR2 on PC. I (almost) can't believe that Microsoft have dropped such a ginormous dump on WMR users - it's one thing to stop support, but it's completely off to outright brick headsets if you simply want to keep Windows fully updated, all while HP are still selling new G2's!!! Mental.

As for the PSVR2 headset itself, while it's resolution is a small drop from G2, those OLED screens will be a very welcome improvement (G2's blacks are definitely not great), and the superior 40Gbps USB C (compared to Quest 3's USB 3) should be more than capable enough of passing visuals just the same as DisplayPort headsets, as long as you have that connectivity.

Sony are presumably just trying to recoup R&D and manufacturing losses, but expanding to a bigger market-base (which does have a nice gap in the market for PSVR2) will hopefully bring VR more to the fore in terms of increased software / games support, longevity and even possibly diversity, and just give the gaming industry something relatively fresh and new for a much overdue change.
Microsoft are not really interested in VR it seems. I hope it bites them. They didn't bother with it for Forza, and the only big game where it is implemented ( to my knowledge ) is MS flight sim. Given that Sony and now Apple are going for it on VR I wonder if this is a mistake. Maybe not, maybe VR will go the way of 3d TVs, but I doubt it somehow.
 
Good alternative for the Reverb G2 and the Quest 3 if they manage to get it done without visual compression. It would be fun if GT7 PC is next.
 
Good alternative for the Reverb G2 and the Quest 3 if they manage to get it done without visual compression. It would be fun if GT7 PC is next.
For reference (from what I've read) HDMI 2.1b works at 48Gbps bandwith and can support uncompressed 8k60. USB C (that's on PSVR2) works up to 40Gbps, and as that headsets resolution would require something in the region of a 6k video signal (when factoring lens barrel distortion compensation) there should be enough bandwith to cover that video signal without compression.

I can definitely say that 4k60 4:4:4 HDR works over USB C as that's how I used to run a display when I had a RTX 2080 Ti, and the specs of USB C show that it's perfectly suited for the higher resolutions that VR needs too.

Quest 3 seriously fumbled the ball by only using a rubbish USB 3 which is pathetically slow in comparison, and is definitely not suitable for uncompressed PCVR.
 
Last edited:
For reference (from what I've read) HDMI 2.1b works at 48Gbps bandwith and can support uncompressed 8k60. USB C (that's on PSVR2) works up to 40Gbps, and as that headsets resolution would require something in the region of a 6k video signal (when factoring lens barrel distortion compensation) there should be enough bandwith to cover that video signal without compression.

I can definitely say that 4k60 4:4:4 HDR works over USB C as that's how I used to run a display when I had a RTX 2080 Ti, and the specs of USB C show that it's perfectly suited for the higher resolutions that VR needs too.

Quest 3 seriously fumbled the ball by only using a rubbish USB 3 which is pathetically slow in comparison, and is definitely not suitable for uncompressed PCVR.
Thanks for this, it answers a few questions I had.
It also gives me hope that the next Pico or Quest might be able to provide uncompressed video over USB C, as I can't see either ever using dport.
 
Last edited:
Premium
If you don't notice you are lucky, it will save you a ton of money:). But road texture is something that really stands out. Drive Nords and you will see it, or Sebring. Some tracks are more noticeable than others. I think for a lot of people, if you don't have something high end to compare to, won't notice. But stick a Varjo Aero or Pimax Crystal on your eyeballs and there is, sadly, no going back.
I've just been doing a bit of experimenting and there appears to be quite a bit of difference between games when it comes to track textures on Quest 3.

AMS2 where I spend most of my VR time I've just spent 20 mins faffing about at different speeds on Nords and the track detail is pretty good, certainly nothing I would consider complaining about easy to see the changes in texture, cracks, tyre marks, writing on the track etc. ACC on the other hand around Bathurst the track does not look good, and could definetly be described as bit swampy fortunately I barely touch ACC. I'm guessing the output from the game engine has a pretty significant impact on what everything looks like after it's been encoded and sent over the cable.

I'm running both of them on the Quest 3 at 90hz, 5408x2912, Encode Bitrate at 700, ASW off etc with pretty much all the track and car detail settings maxed out in game. Obviously AMS2 is known to be far more VR friendly than ACC.

AC I've not tried to setup in VR yet as haven't used if for quite a while and my RF2 install is a bit of a mess so can't really check on that at the moment.
 
Strangely some people are experiencing better eye candy in AMs2 compared to ACC.
But if we are focusing on shimmer/jaggies two graphical artifacts I do hate to see in an VR game. My ranking is: absent in ACC and the most problematic in AC, with AMs2 between both. Admittedly since I discovered Nvidia VRS in Content Manager, it is strongly reduced (at an high performance cost), to acceptably, but the shimmer/jaggies ranking stays the same.
 
Last edited:
Premium
Strangely some people are experiencing better eye candy in AMs2 compared to ACC.
But if we are focusing on shimmer/jaggies two graphical artifacts I do hate to see in an VR game. My ranking is: absent in ACC and the most problematic in AC, with AMs2 between both. Admittedly since I discovered Nvidia VRR in Content Manager, it is strongly reduced (at an high performance cost), to acceptably, but the shimmer/jaggies ranking stays the same.
There is no comparison in vr between acc and ams2. Ams2 is optimised for it and acc isn’t .
 
For reference (from what I've read) HDMI 2.1b works at 48Gbps bandwith and can support uncompressed 8k60. USB C (that's on PSVR2) works up to 40Gbps, and as that headsets resolution would require something in the region of a 6k video signal (when factoring lens barrel distortion compensation) there should be enough bandwith to cover that video signal without compression.

I can definitely say that 4k60 4:4:4 HDR works over USB C as that's how I used to run a display when I had a RTX 2080 Ti, and the specs of USB C show that it's perfectly suited for the higher resolutions that VR needs too.

Quest 3 seriously fumbled the ball by only using a rubbish USB 3 which is pathetically slow in comparison, and is definitely not suitable for uncompressed PCVR.
Let's hope that Sony implements it properly since the bandwidth is there as you describe. Sometimes technically something could be there, but what matters is the implementation.

Great to have an alternative for the G2/Q3 on the market. I'm settled already with the Pimax Crystal(which I would recommend for the pricetag, it's amazing) but for an more affordable HMD the PSVR2 seems to be a winner if there's no compression (quite on par with the Quest 3, which has some upsides and downsides compared to the PSVR2, when both are compared to each other; Q3 has compression but way better lenses/but way worse blacks etc.).
 
Thanks for this, it answers a few questions I had.
It also gives me hope that the next Pico or Quest might be able to provide uncompressed video over USB C, as I can't see either ever using dport.
Yeah, the more I think about it I now remember that 4K60 4:4:4 (uncompressed) HDR is right on the limit of HDMI 2.0 18Gbps bandwith so USB 3.0's 40Gbps should allow for VR required resolutions and Hz's.

This following chart (from HDMI.org) shows that a 5k60 Full RGB/4:4:4 (no chroma subsampling) HDR signal is 30Gbps, which might be roughly comparable to PSVR2 signal?

misc-formatdataratetable-large.jpg


Looking at it another way, using a common VR connectivity method: DisplayPort 1.4 is 32.4Gbps and USB 3.0 is 5 Gbps - so that should theoretically fit within USB-C's 40 Gbps with no video compression (in the streaming sense). It may be possible that there'd be some choma subsampling (going down to 4:2:2 or 4:2:0) but I don't see a mathematical reason why that'd be the case.

It might be worth bearing in mind though that PSVR2 (AFAIK) is 60Hz signal reprojected to 120Hz, which may be the way it'd have to work on PC, or it may even allow native 120Hz - who knows. More importantly though, a Pimax Crystal QLED runs at much higher resolution (2880 x 2880) and at 160Hz apparently over DisplayPort 48Gbps, so hopefully that's another good indicator the PSVR2's 2000 x 2040 @ 120Hz is perfectly possible over USB-C 40Gbps without any compromises.

Don't take any of what I say as factual though - I'm just guestimating with some applied maths.
 
Last edited:
Let's hope that Sony implements it properly since the bandwidth is there as you describe. Sometimes technically something could be there, but what matters is the implementation.
Yeah, substandard implementation is normally Philips' trademark. As a former employee of theirs, I know of quite a few products that were edgy in design but cut a lot of sneaky corners as they didn't want to fully commint to their novelties. I once had their 21:9 TV which was a major flop for a lot of reasons, but a biggie was the fact that although it was a 2560x1080p panel, they didn't want to spend the extra expense on custom electronics, so the boards inside were standard ones only capable of 1920x1080 and used rescaling software instead. Leaders of innovation and losers of implementation.

I'm not aware of any such hijinx with Sony though (?)
 
I really don't care about wireless vr tbh. The added latency might be acceptable for everything else, but not simracing. In simracing, since you're already sit and semi strapped to a rig, what's the point in wireless anyway? DP is the way to go.
 

Latest News

Article information

Author
Thomas Harrison-Lord
Article read time
2 min read
Views
5,051
Comments
54
Last update

How long have you been simracing

  • < 1 year

    Votes: 190 14.0%
  • < 2 years

    Votes: 142 10.4%
  • < 3 years

    Votes: 138 10.1%
  • < 4 years

    Votes: 101 7.4%
  • < 5 years

    Votes: 194 14.3%
  • < 10 years

    Votes: 163 12.0%
  • < 15 years

    Votes: 107 7.9%
  • < 20 years

    Votes: 77 5.7%
  • < 25 years

    Votes: 57 4.2%
  • Ok, I am a dinosaur

    Votes: 191 14.0%
Back
Top