I don't expect any of this to actually happen but if VR does take off at some point, Nintendo's constant low-power approach wouldn't stand a chance competing.......or would it?

Current resolutions of Rift and Vive are 2160 x 1200. Sony’s is 1980 x 1080

That’s 1080 x 1200 PER EYE for rift/vive and 960 x 1080 for Sony.

-          Nintendo could use 2 systems to ‘power’ both eyes. Whatever GPU requirements VR needs for 2 eyes, Nintendo will only need half per NS(i/+/XL)

-          Single eye VR does work. Depth perception is reduced but most impressions say it’s ‘good enough’.

https://www.reddit.com/r/GearVR/search?q=%22one+eye%22+vr&sort=relevance&t=all

http://kotaku.com/playing-occulus-rift-with-only-one-eye-1074765790

This drops GPU reqs to ¼(per NS) of what full VR requires. It would be a crappy product for a crappy one-eyed customer. Perfect.

-          Nintendo IPs are easier to VR than Sony’s due to their cartoony focus vs realism.

-          Nintendo’s solution would be mobile. It would still have wires but you wouldn’t be tied to the room the console is in.

-          It would be an added bonus when 2 consoles are present, not the main focus of the system.

Even 8K per eye will not deliver ‘VR perfection’

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/09/virtual-perfection-why-8k-resolution-per-eye-isnt-enough-for-perfect-vr/

A system that can deliver 16K (8K per eye), at 60 fps, with realistic graphics seems a long way away. Whereas for ‘pirate-VR’ combining 2 or even 4 NS systems to provide the GPU power seems much more achievable.

It puts Sony on a path of having to either copy Nintendo’s model or consistently be 2-8 times more powerful than Nintendo’s console to play the AAA experiences each system offers.

By the time VR is relevant, I'm sure Nintendo will have a product out that is powerful enough to support it. But I frankly don't they should even consider it until they can make a headset that is at most $200 and is wireless. In other words, until it is actually viable as a commercial product.

VR as a mainstream concept is years away, they have lots of time to make preparations.

The only thing these kind of threads manage to do for me is make me sigh.

The transfer speeds for 'HD-VR' will not be possible wirelessly for a long time.

Combining the GPU of multiple systems means $1000 of high end gear becomes much cheaper split between 4 friends or family members.

The true attempt at VR for the masses is already out and as far as I'm aware PS VR failed to set the world on fire.
I think nintendo will be fine without VR for a while longer.

im sure the time vr is relevant will be 2017.

with psvr many people get finally the chance to test psvr (in an electronic market, at a friends house and co). That just wasnt possible yet.

Scince i got mine psvr all people that tried it are instantly thinking about getting it as well. Especially because its super easy right now with psvr. Most people already own a ps4/old model is just 200 bucks and the psvr is also not as expensive as rift/vive. 400 bucks should be achievable for alot more ppl then rift/vive. Its about the same priece as a new television.

Maybe I just don't understand the tech - If Nintendo could wirelessly stream to the Gamepad without an issue, why is it different with VR?

It might be closer than you think. With Samsungs new 5" 11K screen (2018) plus eye tracking and foveated rendering (Fove) it could be possible in 2020.
5.5k per eye corresponds to the recommended sitting distance for 1080p tv. It will look as good as 1080p looks now, except over 100 degree fov instead of 35 degrees, sitting at 1.38x diagonal screen size. Actually the recommded seating for 1080p is 1.63x diagonal screen size with 30 degree fov, however these headsets also have higher density of pixels towards the center. I expect 5.5k per eye to be a very close match to 1080p quality at smpte standards. (Ofcourse it can be better otherwise we would not have 4K tv now)

Plus the higher the resolution of the screens the bigger the advantages of foveated rendering become. Fove already expects a 5x to 6x savings on their 2560x1440 headset in GPU requirements.


Anyway strapping 1 or more NS systems to your face, if it can't be perfects anyway, doesn't seem like a good alternative.

The gamepad streams 854x480 at 60 fps = 562 mbps. WiiU Gamepad uses chroma subsampling and h.264 compression to bring it down to about 30 mbps, which adds lag.

PSVR streames 1920x1080 at 120 fps = 5.56 gbps. No color reduction since pixels are in your face, no compression since vr is very lag sensitive.