By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Skyrim VR is my Game of the Year

SegataSanshiro said:
Skyrim is one of the worst RPGs I ever played. Worse than Beyond the Beyond. VR is also one of the dumbest things I have ever used. From recent VR to the VR I tried in the mid-90s. All I can think of is some people should play far more games and systems.

Beyond the beyond was one of my favorite rpg’s when I was a kid...😢



Around the Network
Madword said:
I like VR, I have PS VR, and have enjoyed it so far (had it since launch). It is too bulky and a pain to set up in my environment (I'm hoping to get it better arranged in my office to make it easier to play)... so it doesn't get used as much as I want it to.

I've enjoyed static games or games where you are seated more, not sure how I'll get on with Skyrim. Having played W-industries VR headset way back in the early 90's, tech is much better than then. I think it still has a long way to go but for some gaming experiences it cannot be beat.

Now onto Skyrim, I am in two minds about this game, it came out a while a go, and on one hand its a poor RPG, but on the other hand it has some very good addictive gameplay elements. So I can see why people enjoy it. Hopefully Bethesda improve their engine, because for me, they are falling behind in open world games compared to other people now, and their need to stick with the same engine isn't doing them any favours. Fallout 4 wasn't as good as Fallout 3 in terms of storytelling and just overall fun (the whole town building thing just didn't work).

I play Skyrim seated with the moves. It works great, I can't stand up and play for 5 hours! Sure standing gives you a bit more immersion initially with being able to physically move about a bit yet you quickly forget about that while seated. You can still lean, an pick things up from the ground, just looking behind you without rotating is a bit harder. (A patch for full smooth turning is on the way)

I have the breakout box sitting on top of the ps4 with all the cables neatly looped together. I still move the ps4 to the 4K tv now and then (in another room) and it's just a matter of pulling the 4 cables out from the back and slide it out from underneath the breakout box. Putting it back also only takes 5 seconds. The headset cable runs along the wall where it sits next to my couch where I play. I put the camera in front of the screen when I start to play, higher is better.

Skyrim has that exploration itch that still works wonders the second time around. You set out to do one thing and on the way locations light up on the radar. Which is very neatly projected underneath you, look slightly down to check, look back up, no intrusive hud :) I can't resist checking everything out and end up dungeon crawling all the time which is really really cool in VR in Skyrim.

Cerebralbore101 said:
funkateer2 said:

Part of VR is that it's at least 90fps. 60 is really too low for VR. Besides stereoscopy, Virtual Reality also sports a very high FoVThose are all very important things in gaming graphics. So yes, VR improves graphics better than 4K or 60fps (imho).

If you're up to wearing a VR headset of course (and splashing down the money for for it). Personally I think VR is a real game changer, and I dearly hope that it will become more mean stream.

Are you sure about that 90 fps part? I'm not sure a PS4 Pro with PSVR can do 90fps. 

Skyrim VR is 60fps reprojected to 120fps. It doesn't have a pro patch yet, but I assume that if that comes, it will be used for supersampling and increasing the lod distance. 60fps reprojected to 120fps is plenty for an RPG. PSVR even has a few games with native 120fps, Trackmania Turbo and Polybius (on base ps4) an extremely fast paced arcade racer and shooter. There  you can see the difference.

Btw animations in Skyrim still look limited to 30fps in many instances, movement is locked 60fps, and head turning is 120fps.

ThisGuyFooks said:
I know this will sound corny AF, but when you play Skyrim in VR, do you "feel" there?

How deep is the immersion?

When you are in a town, do you actually feel there?

I do. Last night I was doing the quest with the dog Barbas. He kept coming up to me in my face and looking straight at me, felt very real. Whiterun was much easier to navigate and yes you feel like you're there. I'm just amazed at all the details in the game that come out now. Ants on tree stumps, birds that fly off, fish in the water, following wildlife around, watching someone working at the saw mill actually putting the log in, sawing it in half and it stays there, people splitting wood and going about their business, watching the water flow over rocks, all the stuff I just ran past 6 years ago.

Plus it adds so much to the immersion that you can simply look around, above and below you. If you have a fear of heights it might be a bit too much in some places :) And of course leaning to look around corners, under tables or though cracks or open windows is something you could never do before.

It's not perfect. Menus are still clunky and interrupt the experience. Your health bar is a bit hard to keep track off in the middle of a fight with no further indication that death is imminent. Luckily quicksave is quick and reloading is fast as well. Menus at least remember the last thing you picked in each category so with a bit of practice switching weapons becomes easier. I just read you can also use the favorites menu for that and simply press left O in game, I'll check that out next time. It already remembers your one hand setup when you unequip the bow, you don't have to assign each hand again. Anyway after 10 hours the menus become second nature as well as the map screen which is really neat.



SegataSanshiro said:

VR is a dumb gimmick that has been around longer than half the people on this forum have been alive. Skyrim is an awful game no matter what.

 

 

I agree that VR has sucked and been a gimmick for most of it's life. But what makes modern VR stand above is the 3D Head Mounted Display. Ideally you want to play with normal controller and just use the HMD for better immersion, sound and visuals. 



The unfortunate reality is that VR is still not ready for prime time. The resolution is far too low. So, in the case of a game like Skyrim, one must choose between good graphics on the TV, or extreme screen door effect in VR. The capabilities of the head-mounted displays need to step up a couple more levels before VR will become mainstream for gaming, IMO.



VAMatt said:
The unfortunate reality is that VR is still not ready for prime time. The resolution is far too low. So, in the case of a game like Skyrim, one must choose between good graphics on the TV, or extreme screen door effect in VR. The capabilities of the head-mounted displays need to step up a couple more levels before VR will become mainstream for gaming, IMO.

I'm just glad as a console manufacturer Sony is actually trying with todays technology. This way they can perfect and improve it in the future. Or else someone else would have done it first this gen. 



Around the Network
VAMatt said:
The unfortunate reality is that VR is still not ready for prime time. The resolution is far too low. So, in the case of a game like Skyrim, one must choose between good graphics on the TV, or extreme screen door effect in VR. The capabilities of the head-mounted displays need to step up a couple more levels before VR will become mainstream for gaming, IMO.

Screendoor effect is actually very minimal in PSVR. I hardly ever notice it. The resolution is low, yet was good enough for last gen. What you get here is Skyrim as it was last gen, with extra foliage, quick load times, solid 60fps, included DLC, motion controls that actually work and improve the game in VR and all the other benefits of having 2 hands and a high fov viewpoint that's not fixed to the character's body.

The resolution is not too low, everything can easily be seen, text is easy to read, menus are very clear. The only time resolution is too low is when trying to read labels on the map from faraway places, simply move the map.

What the displays need to become mainstream is to become cheaper and wireless with inside out tracking to make setup as easy as putting on a pair of sunglasses. (Although the sensor bar never hindered the Wii's success...) Resolution is the least of the 'problems' standing in the way. $450 for headset, camera, moves and Skyrim is what's standing in the way. Actually it's $350 atm, great deal https://www.bestbuy.com/site/sony-playstation-vr-the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim-vr-bundle/6131108.p?skuId=6131108. But that's still more than the console itself. It's worth it though.



Vizigoth04 said:
VAMatt said:
The unfortunate reality is that VR is still not ready for prime time. The resolution is far too low. So, in the case of a game like Skyrim, one must choose between good graphics on the TV, or extreme screen door effect in VR. The capabilities of the head-mounted displays need to step up a couple more levels before VR will become mainstream for gaming, IMO.

I'm just glad as a console manufacturer Sony is actually trying with todays technology. This way they can perfect and improve it in the future. Or else someone else would have done it first this gen. 

True, this gen devs are experimenting with all kinds of ways how to do things in VR. On the Bethesda forum for Skyrim people are making excellent suggestions how to improve the UI and movement options, and the devs are listening to that. Next gen will have a lot of things or what and what not to do in VR sorted out already.

I've been playing PSVR since launch and it's cool to see how fast things are progressing.



SvennoJ said:
VAMatt said:
The unfortunate reality is that VR is still not ready for prime time. The resolution is far too low. So, in the case of a game like Skyrim, one must choose between good graphics on the TV, or extreme screen door effect in VR. The capabilities of the head-mounted displays need to step up a couple more levels before VR will become mainstream for gaming, IMO.

Screendoor effect is actually very minimal in PSVR. I hardly ever notice it. The resolution is low, yet was good enough for last gen. What you get here is Skyrim as it was last gen, with extra foliage, quick load times, solid 60fps, included DLC, motion controls that actually work and improve the game in VR and all the other benefits of having 2 hands and a high fov viewpoint that's not fixed to the character's body.

The resolution is not too low, everything can easily be seen, text is easy to read, menus are very clear. The only time resolution is too low is when trying to read labels on the map from faraway places, simply move the map.

What the displays need to become mainstream is to become cheaper and wireless with inside out tracking to make setup as easy as putting on a pair of sunglasses. (Although the sensor bar never hindered the Wii's success...) Resolution is the least of the 'problems' standing in the way. $450 for headset, camera, moves and Skyrim is what's standing in the way. Actually it's $350 atm, great deal https://www.bestbuy.com/site/sony-playstation-vr-the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim-vr-bundle/6131108.p?skuId=6131108. But that's still more than the console itself. It's worth it though.

I must confess that I have no played Skyrim VR. So, I can't speak to that game specifically.  But, I have been playing around with VR since Rift DK2, and have used every major system since.  For me, resolution is the biggest problem, or possibly tied for biggest with the lack of wireless connectivity.  Its what makes VR a novelty in my house.  

Aside from gaming, I think a great use of VR will be watching live sporting events.  I watched a live boxing match a couple of years ago on Gear VR.  It was by far the best VR experience I've had.  But, even with something like boxing, which takes place in a small ring, the resolution was a big drawback.  I watched live golf a while later, and the resolution ruined it - couldn't follow the ball.  These were both Gear VR experiences, which are not on the same level as those that the more advanced system can provide.  But, to my eyes, even the Vive and Rift don't have what it takes to make VR an everyday use technology just yet.  

With all of that said, I am glad that some of the big boys are still spending on development.  Hopefully VR will be where I want it to be within the next decade.  



Vodacixi said:
And yet... as long as I breath I will never put on one of those VR headsets to play a videogame.

 

Yeah...there were people who said they would never board a devilish train either....



SegataSanshiro said:
d21lewis said:

That's what we call "an opinion" and a hyperbolic one, at that. I'm not going to debate you. I didn't even want Skyrim until recently and I didn't even get it for the PSVR. You don't like it and that's cool.

Ah, Hyperbole the internets favorite word to try and put someone down. Not working. VR is a dumb gimmick. It's been around since the 80s. Remember VR Cafes? I do. Skyrim is bad. That's just a fact. It's badly made for an actual RPG.

It seems there’s hardly a base for a discussion with you. I’m sure Skyrim got all those countless game of the year awards for being a bad game. It may be your opinion, but it’s in no way a fact. Skyrim to date is still one of the most immersive games I ever played and I can’t wait to try it in VR.

 

VAMatt said: 
The unfortunate reality is that VR is still not ready for prime time. The resolution is far too low. So, in the case of a game like Skyrim, one must choose between good graphics on the TV, or extreme screen door effect in VR. The capabilities of the head-mounted displays need to step up a couple more levels before VR will become mainstream for gaming, IMO. 

PSVR really has a more sophisticated screen than Vive and Oculus which minimises the screen door effect. It also has a faster refresh rate at 120 Hz. It’s fine to me.

That said, it’s true...the best times for VR are still to come. Once eye tracking and forested rendering is implemented graphical quality is going to evolve quickly!

Last edited by Errorist76 - on 19 November 2017