3D which was embraced by every major motion picture studio, every single TV manufacturer and BD player manufacturer didnt penetrate due to "having to wear glasses" So immersion in movies, with negligible costs, built in entry (most TV's have 3d standard now) and backing by hollywood couldnt get people on board due to the glasses.

Unless this literally has every game released while its available compatible i suspect a big fat "meh" from the general public.

Like someone above me stated, the PS4 is clear, concise, functional, and focused. Hell the big leap this gen PSNow is games centric, games games games, functionality and support. The PS brand doesn't need this IMO.

I mean its isolation, the whole marketing campaign for PS+ is about playing with your friends the whole PS4 marketing campaign is gaming with people, this headset creates isolation. Mixed unclear messaging does not sell.

Sometimes I feel like the only one that knows Sony has been making one they sell for $1,000 USD for a while now:

Sony HMZ-T3W Personal 3D Viewer

Get into the Personal 3D Viewer from Sony. Connect your Blu-ray Disc player, gaming console and HMDI-capable PC all wirelessly and even connect compatible mobile devices and smartphones to enjoy your favorite movies and games with a virtual 750-inch screen from 65 feet (like a movie theater) and virtual 7.1 Surround Sound—even in 3D! Now playing for your eyes and ears only.

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-HMZ-T3W-Head-Mounted-Viewer/dp/B00FNJGJN0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1395199465&sr=8-1&keywords=sony+vr+headset

I think it's a matter of making something that works that is comfortable to wear and affordable. Those are quite a few conditions.

Yeah, that's pretty much out of the question expensive...however, how awesome would it be to have those if they were comfortable and didn't strain the eyes lol.

Is there any physical drawbacks to this, for example people losing eye sight because of staring at something so close?

No.

Some people will of course have issues and feel sick, but the tech uses lenses to make the screen appear far away.

Hah, like you don't? Give me a break...!

We all know that gamers care how they look when playing. Even I, a guy, do 2-3 hours of make-up before a gaming session... I mean, what if my friends are watching me while gaming and my hair is not set or I have a pimple on my nose?!

Its embarrassing!

With a new cam and move the price is already at a soft $99. I wonder how much it will cost on top of that? I really can't see it being less than 279 total right now and that is being really generous in my mind with 299-349 being more likely unless you have some pieces already.

Personal 3D viewers are not virtual reality.

Heck even the Virtual Boy was not virtual reality.

Occulus Rift and Project Morpheus are all about presence, not just a personal 3D image. Don't get me wrong though, 3D is a very important part of it. You know how in 3D movies you always jump when an object pops out at you? This is because you're "forgetting" just for a split second that it isn't real. For that split second your brain is convinced a real object is about to hit you. That's presence, and with VR the goal is to have it last not for just a moment but forever.

Virtual reality devices like Rift and Morpheus simulate everything they can about the real world so that your brain can't tell it's not real. For example just watch this video about audio. Be sure to use headphones: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUDTlvagjJA

Watch that before continuing to read my response please. I don't want to spoil it for you.

Amazing huh? When that door opens at the very beginning, didn't you look in the real world to see who was there? If you at least felt the urge to, then you experienced the magic of presence and VR. Bringing 3D video into the mix as well as motion and rotation tracking really completes the experience. When using VR you know it's not real, but your brain deep down is convinced that it is. When standing on the ledge of a tall building in VR, you get butterflies in your stomach. If you try to walk off, your body will want to resist. It's just incredible technology. Presence is a killer app. To compare VR to devices that don't focus on presence is just silly.

We've yet to see if OR can reach that promised price point. They still need to include wireless and virtual surround headphones, plus OR only has a single 1080p screen. Sony can save some costs on the motion sensors though and let the camera do most of the work.

It's kind of hard to believe that they will go from a $1000 720p wired headset, to a $300 1080p wireless headset with head tracking. (Although reading back the GDC live report, wireless seems to be on a 'hope' basis for now)

Anyway if they want to sell a 1080p version that low I'll pre-order it asap. Anything below 700 for a 1080p VR headset sounds amazing to me. Never thought that would be possible so soon. Same for OR.

I think the problem with 3D is that it's an upgrade with drawbacks. People like 3D content on TVs, but they don't like having to wear the glasses. Hence for most people they just stick with the convenience of 2D.

VR is something new. It's has similarities with 3D of course, but it's not an upgrade of existing devices. A gamer who likes VR is not going to say "that's cool, but I'll just stick with playing on the tv." Well they'll certainly say that for games converted to VR, but not for games built from the ground up for VR. Take the Mars demo they talked about today. That's impossible to enjoy without the VR headset.

It's really similar to motion controls on the Wii. People didn't like when motion was used as an alternative to buttons, but they loved when it allowed new experiences. Wii Sports is impossible to experience without the wiimote just like the Mars demo is impossible to experience without VR. Avatar and Gravity however are still the same movie in 2D, just maybe less epic.

Project Morpheus is not for every game. Some genres like racing translate perfectly to VR, while others fail horribly. Devs will need to create fully new experiences, just like they did 20 years ago when not all 2D games could switch to 3D. Or just like they did a decade ago with Wii. Or like they did 5 years ago with Kinect. I agree that support is very important, but VR needs games built from the ground up instead of ports.

Morpheus is still a long way from releasing. We'll just have to wait and see how it blends in with the current devices. However, I wouldn't say the PS4 itself is clear, concise, clean, and functional. Sony has done an exceptional job marketing it, but the PS4 is already a potluck of technologies. Share button, touchpad, light bar sans camera, speaker, lightbar and camera, move (it's still supported!), remote play, and the playstation app. As a gamer we can control the system with the DS4, Vita, our voice, our body, Move, and our smartphone. That's pretty convoluted.

Why is VR isolation? First of all locally the PS4 displays an undistorted view of what is being rendered for VR. This would be like remote play, if Vita took the role of VR. People can still watch one person play the game, although yeah it's a less social form of it. Even if VR involved the gamer going off to a secluded island to play, I'd imagine this isolation would only be a problem with gamers that only play local multiplayer. Being "social" nowadays means communicating with people through the internet. VR has no drawback with internet sociality. In fact due to the possibilities of virtual hangouts ala second life/home, VR is even more "social" than modern gaming. Sony can keep marketing exactly how they are. All the commercials I've seen have been a bunch of friends playing online together.