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.
Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)
Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!
