From all the considerations made and the issues pointed out in this and other threads, it could be deduced that due to display tech, computing power and cost limitations, VR could start as pilot project, at reasonable price, but performances still limited, and with ambitions of limited market penetration, later this gen, but performances high enough to allow it to become enjoyable for people different from tech enthusiasts will have to wait longer, and it will be affordable, but probably still optional, during 9th gen, and only starting with 10th gen, performance will be high enough at a cost low enough to be included, if considered necessary for the producers' plans, as standard equipment in gaming and entertainment platforms.

Given whats been shows it might just be a big part of gaming, eve valkyrie looks good enough to me that i dont think more power of a new gen down the line is really needed.  While Kinetic on 360 has shown just how succesfull an addon can be, i beleive theres much more support in gaming for vr then there ever was for waggle. 

I dont think standard equipment is needed, those that want will get it those that dont save $.   All that is needed is one killer app that cant be done on a regular console tv experience to light a fire under peoples ass's.  Will take just one FPS to do that in NA while Europe is easy enough for Sony.  GT7 VR edition, ill pay whatever to get that and Vr success guarenteed on the old continent.   

Yes, but don't forget that here on this site we're all more dedicated to gaming than average, what can persuade us won't be enough for other people. And even amongst us, power whores could find meh a 1080p display for VR helmets, as 1080p is fine for a display, viewed from a distance and occupying a few tens degrees of our field of view, but it becomes mid definition in a helmet, where it occupies almost the whole field of view. Also, for prolonged use, high refresh rate and fps, extremely comfortable design and materials and very low weight, will be of the essence, tech won't arrive to that levels, and at mainstream prices too, in short times (casuals will want these high performances and specs purely for comfort of use, unlike power whores, but different causes will have the same effect on adoption of the new tech).
Don't forget that even 20 years ago VR had become the latest tech fad, but tech not mature and cheap enough yet ended up stopping the attempts quickly and delaying successive ones to relaunch it as mainstream by two decennia, while in limited fields, mainly scientific and industrial ones, but also very small niche games and entertainment apps, research, development and use has continued and increased quite steadily, but remaining of limited size anyway.
Standard equipment could be not necessary if VR will be at least available as option on enough platforms to make the total user base large enough, but, again, just one killer up could be good to start, but it will have to be followed up by a regular stream of releases to last and not fade away again.
This said, commitment by both Sony and OR, and probably some less known projects too, is good news, the wider the efforts, the sooner the critical mass, at least for the first phase, could be reached. A far larger gaming and computing overall market than 20 years ago will help a lot too, a 10% niche now (including console gamers plus even just those 100 million more hardcore than average PC gamers and not including the other 300 million casual ones) could be larger than a hefty 40% market share back then.

http://www.destructoid.com/sony-s-project-morpheus-an-impressive-first-showing-272262.phtml

"We were surprised to find that Project Morpheus is already on a level playing field with Oculus Rift, and even shows it up in some places."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-03-20-how-does-morpheus-shape-up-to-oculus

"As an experience it's comparable to Oculus - to the DK2, that is, the most recent iteration of the headset that incorporates Crystal Cove and that opened up pre-orders yesterday - although there are clear points of differentiation."

http://www.engadget.com/2014/03/19/project-morpheus-hands-on/

"There are still some pretty major issues to overcome in Project Morpheus. Vision blur, for instance, is a much bigger problem on Morpheus than on Crystal Cove/Rift DK2. The screen resolution is also clearly not as high as DK2, making everything a bit muddier, visually speaking."

http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/19/5526730/sony-morpheus-vr-headset-compares-well-to-oculus-rift

"Sony's VR headset is a worthy competitor for the Oculus Rift"

http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2014/03/project-morpheus-impressions/

"Having tried both Sony’s new Project Morpheus virtual reality prototype for PlayStation 4 and the latest development kit from Oculus, I have to give the slight edge to the young upstart."

http://www.polygon.com/2014/3/19/5526966/project-morpheus-sonys-playstation-4-virtual-reality-helmet-is-much

"Sony's challenge was to prove that it could do virtual reality as well as the Oculus Rift, and they passed that test with ease. The display looks wonderful, the demos were running at 60 frames per second, the screens looked just about as good as the Rift Development Kit 2"

http://www.slashgear.com/project-morpheus-first-impressions-ps4-vr-headset-in-motion-19321318/

"this experience is just as massive as Oculus Rift’s DK2. While it’s not all as perfectly smooth as Oculus Rift, since we’re still ever-so-limited by the PS4’s abilities in this unit, it’s still not bringing us the same queasy feeling we had with the first Oculus Rift experience."

There's every single article I could find that compares PM with OR. It's just absurd that you're so adamant that the two aren't even comparable.

always wear your PPE!

You could compare the development of VR with that of tv.
The early devices are comparable to the first tv demonstrations at 30 and 240 lines of resolution.
Now we get into the stage of the first commercial tv sets that you invite friends over for to show off / try out.
For tv a big leap forward was color, for VR it will be variable stereoscopic depth adjusting with your eyes by tracking the pupil. The latter might not happen for a long time. HD and higher framerates are technically a lot easier to achieve, no bulky crt to hold that aspect back this time.

It's opening up a new form of entertainment to the masses. Exciting to be at the birth of yet another new exciting technology.

Agree. Anyway, your points are both a good reason to be optimistic, but also a good one to not rush things, thwarting a huge project that if carried out in the correct short, mid and long term phases, without rushing the latter two, has finally very good chances of success: outside of the enthusiastic early adopters, total comfort of use, right price and large SW library are of the essence, betting too early on mass market and disappointing it, bringing to large amounts of unsold units, would cause heavy losses, driving away part of successive investments and actually slowing the roadmap, just like it happened with the first attempts many years ago.

Good work with the quotes.

Clearly the consensus is that OR is still much better than Morpheus. And the understanding from everyone in the know is that OR will be a higher budget experience overall than Morpheus - which will be a slightly cheaper VR option.

Saying, "It's just absurd that you're so adamant that the two aren't even comparable" is really making a hyperbole! Seriously! Think about it;

The THREAD title says Morpheus is BETTER. The truth is that Morpheus is an amazing first iteration that will no doubt improve. But anyone who's been looking at VR for quite some time will acknowledge that Morpheus WILL be surpassed by OR - even if it be a later release. But even at this stage OR2 is better than Morpheus.

So you thinking "it's just absurd" is absurd.