For those of you who don't know me very well, one of my favorite things to talk about was virtual reality. I don't think I can peacefully die without experience a game where you have to actually jack in like the matrix or something that at least mimics that effect.

With that being said I'm high excited about Occulus Rift and have one that's coming in soon (should be any day I ordered it a month ago). It may not be true simulation VR just yet, but it's a leap closer and that has me pretty happy dying to try one. 

One of my friends mentioned something at work though the other day. Their are a lot of people in my laboratory excited for the rift and one made the comment of, "What if XBONE or ps4 supported oculus rift?"

That wet my mind a little bit and would be a pretty big shocker at e3 if it was announced. 

One thing to keep in mind is that Valve has shown great support for it and i have heard no negative comments on the product from any company or  anyone who has tried it yet. Would you guys like the idea about it being available? Not mandatory of course, but as an optional way to experience games.

I looked up PS4 and Oculus Rift. There was one tweet from some Sony guy about the rift, BUT I doubt that Sony will directly support it given that they have their own headset on the market already, and a better, oculus rift like, gaming only version, with leds for the pseye to pick up position besides the tech that exists in the Move for angles and without sound would maybe make sense financially for them. If not, then I sure hope they fully support the Rift. Why PS4? Because Oculus Rift to control the view with PS Move to control the movement and gun would be KILLER!

Although the Oculus Rift uses a 1280x800 (640x800 per eye) display in the current dev version it is advised to use 1600x1000 or more per eye when rendering the game. Yet testers still report that it's very noticebly pixelated ("like watching through a fly screen"), because the pixel density is not high enough.

Hence the consumer version will use a higher resolution display, but probably requires an even higher resolution per eye rendering. I doubt any of the new consoles are powerful enough to render (highly demanding) games at these resolutions.

Sony should just release a more powerfull version of the PS4 in 3 years or so, they could easily double everything by that time for a price equal or maybe even lower than a PS4 will cost at launch.

I would take PS3 first party quality first person or driving games on an Oculus rift over anything next gen looking on a flat surface, be it any resolution. Being in the game is the holy grail and stereoscopic 3D that covers most of a person's field of view is the easiest technical step to achieve that. 

Plus, next gen console will be capable enough to render demanding games at those resolutions, but ofcourse, as always, with less bling than the non stereoscopic version. And before anyone says that they will wait for hardware powerfull enough so that there'll be no difference between the two, just think about it. If all of the power is used to render two images at 1080p that cover a wide angle of the acene, them rendering only one which covers far less of an angle of the scene on a flat screen at the same quality will mean that resources are left untapped. I doubt anyone will leave easily usable resources untapped.

Technically the way 3D is done with the ps3 now is the same that is done with the rift. However it's covering all of your vision and you have a screen for each eye instead of one screen running at double the FPS with glasses cutting out half of the fps from one image into one eye. So saying that it can't support it is a little ignorant.

From reading the DEV situation with the screens the reason the resolution is low is because of the cost of the screens. They got started on kickstarter and are just beginning to actually see some income. Making large resolution screens by bulk will take time.