The refrash rate isnt the only thing thats important in a VR headset (Unless the Rift/Vive was running in 30-60hz).

PSVR on almost every game (Except the most simple of simple games) is doubling the 60fps image input to 90-120FPS, whereas the Rift requires the PC to give it a native 90fps image input. Not only that!, but to Hit that 1080@60FPS them PS4 games are going to see cuts to their graphics. The is no extra box powering the VR headset its all being done on the PS4 itself a console that so far pretty much has a standard of 1080@30fps.

Also native framerate is always going to be better. ATW should really only be used as a "framerate doubler" on low end PCs and the PS4. For everyone else it should only be used for smoothing out transients and ensure low latency at all times.

Your trying to say that the OR price has nothing to do with its Hardware, and that it is worse hardware then whats in the PSVR and the only reason its so expensive is cos Facebook doesnt know how to manafacture them. Do you even listen to yourself sometimes??.  Its clear for anyone to see that The Rift and the Vive are "Premium" devices with Premium Price, for the High End VR person who wants the best experience, and PSVR is more for the lower end and the Casuals so it can hit mass market and this isnt really a bad thing!!..

"If you just talk about the high-end quality, yes, I would admit that Oculus may have better VR," Sony Computer Entertainment vice president Masayasu Ito told Polygon.

I cant believe your even trying to say Sony is wrong lol. Why is this simple thing so hard to grasp and accept?? they are both for different markets.

For me, when i do get a VR headset i want Nextgen experience with Nextgen Graphics, but thats me. Like i said they are both being marketed to different markets and different people.

Sony themselfs have said this. Im pretty sure that many people will be happy playing Wii looking (Judging from that Social Game) and High Res PS3 looking (Since pretty much most of the games that hit 60FPS on PS4 is pretty much remasters or games thats not too advanced) games on their PSVR unit.

And this isnt me saying this trolling or flaming, its just impossible for a Console to get more powerful. This to me is like the Whole DX12 secret sauce thing the X1 fans used to use. Its just not possible to make the console do what it cant. It was the same thing lastgen with 3D and the PS3 imo.

Basically your wrong. Also we have 3 NX threads in Forum hot topics right now.

Well the orginal kinect was a success (especially first year) the problem was the lack of games. 

 that when i got to that part at the start where you have to jump down from one of the buildings i got proper scared

to jump cos i felt so high up that my mind tricked me.

hands on impressions from peoOR is 90 hz native while psvr is 60 hz with reprojection to 120, 90 hz native, and 120 hz native.   OR and vive have a higher resolution but sony's higher subpixel screen looks better to many people.  a lot of the other states are 1:1 identical and psvr is suppost to be much more comfortable to wear.ple that have used both have clearly stated that psvr has a very good headset that competes very well techinically with OR and vive.  

gist is the "premium" experience of pcvr is almost entirely the difference in the hardware playing the game not in the headset itself.

it's great that you want nextgen graphics for vr but i think you'll be disappointed.  graphics wise the vr games are not impressive on any platform.  for as long as the consumer base is 0 there is only so much investment any company will make on a game and if psvr outsells pcvr (and it is quite likely) there is little hope that you'll that a AAAA pcvr game because (like every game ever) developers will target consoles and do nothing but increase resolution and framerate on pc.