I'm almost sure I'd have motion sickness and headaches if I play this. That's why I'm not willing to have a go.

VR really is awesome. I can't live without it anymore. I barely play any flat games since I got my first VR headset in 2016.

To me, the PSVR is a cool thing to have, but I've only ever used it a couple times since I bought it. I bought a PS4 Pro within a week of getting a PSVR because I was hoping it would make things look a bit nicer. With the OG PS4, I was disappointed. The Pro didn't make it much better. Yes, the resolution is low, but from my experiences with it, the power of the PS4 Pro is not enough to fully utilize the resolutions of the PSVR.

When a game needs to run at 90 FPS, sacrifices need to be made, and while resolution was one of them, it wasn't the only area where cutbacks were made. There are certain visual styles that work better than others. Thumper looked alright, but a game like RE7 looked washed out and low-detail, despite still being scary as shit.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the PSVR + PS4 Pro hardware was not quite enough to fully realize the potential of VR, and doesn't compare to the experience you would get with more high-end hardware. It was enough to tease me for what a PSVR2 could end up being, and I look forward to getting my hands (or head?) on the next installment.

The problem with this kind of thinking is that it might never match the fidelity any console can cram onto a flat screen at 30 fps. Skyrim on PSVR is on par with the ps3 version while running at 60 fps in 3D with a much larger fov instead of 720p narrow fov while dropping to 20 fps.

RE7 was also not made for psvr but ported to it. Astrobot, Moss, Blood and truth all look much better. Of course nothing like Death stranding on a 4K HDR display. PSVR2 will be the same, matching ps4 visuals while being far behind what the ps5 can pump out at 4K30 with narrow fov.

Perhaps psvr2 will have some eye tracking with foveated rendering which will reduce the rendering load to better match the fidelity and apparent resolution of a flat screen game. However I don't think reliable eye tracking is quite there yet to get the full benefits of it. Plus the benefits increase with resolution. There is hardly anything to gain with the current headset since the resolution is already at the lowest end of vision, a bit more to gain with 1920x2432 per eye. (Japan Display (JDI), a LCD manufacturer co-run by Sony, recently unveiled its 3.2-inch, 1,001 pixels-per-inch (ppi) displays with 2160 x 2432 resolution)
https://www.techradar.com/news/playstation-vr-2-release-date-price-news-and-rumors

I wouldn't put it completely off. There are plenty of VR experiences where you don't move around, like Moss and SuperHot, except for your head and hands.  Those track perfectly with your head movement, so it doesn't make you sick.  Then, there are games that only slightly move or move slower, like Astro Bots and Battle Zone.  Those may give you motion sickness or not, depending on how prone to it you are. If you are worried, I would suggest ot playing fast paced games, like Wipeout or Thumper.  Or try them out and if they do cause motion sickness, take a break and play something else.

Lol.  Yea, it does make me wish more games tried adding VR functionality.  If I'm by myself, I'm definitely always watching Hulu with the PS VR.  I'm amazed how much they actually did for it.  Watching TV and movies inside your own private IMAX theater is freaking awesome.

I don't think it's so much the resolution of the game, but the PS VR itself.  If PSVR2 is B/C with all PSVR1 games, I think that would definitely make those games even more breathtaking.  Having said that, the lower resolution still doesn't hurt my enjoyment of the games.  And like @SvennoJ said, some games made specifically for the device, like Astro Bots and Moss, look more impressive.

I am glad you are still like me and excited for the next VR headset.  Considering Astro Bots already looks great, I can't wait to see what the PS5 can pull off.  Especially when the headset is 1440p, ~1.8x the resolution of the PSVR1.  And here's hoping it is B/C.

One thing I've noticed is room scale helped me tremendously with the VR motion sickness vs the seated experience with psvr. I would get bad motion sickness on psvr playing over an hour.. some games, even worse in less time. I  still occasionally play my psvr, but ever since I got a wireless adapter for my htc Vive, that's been my go to. It's a world of a difference in VR not feeling being tethered and being able to move around freely.  just wish Capcom would port RE7 to pc already..

When i played Thumber i didn't get sick at all. To my surprise. When i tried the Drive Club VR demo however my eyes criss crossed and headache started almost immediatly. I think i didn't even start driving.

I'm excited for PSVR2, but tbh i would like to jump right to third or forth generation. Dont care much for tethered vs. untethered. More for FOV, resolution, eye tracking. Those are far more important when it comes to preventing motion sickness and ensuring comfortable VR experiences.

In the PSVR community we call it "getting your VR legs".

Wipeout is brutal the first time you play it, I felt awful after the first race.  I took a break, came back and did another and it wasn't so bad.  After another break I did my third race and the motion sickness was gone.  Now I can play it without feeling motion sickness at all.

So just like Getting your sea legs , you need to get your VR legs.  Just push on!

Fortunately, PSVR2 is supposed to bring improvements in all 3 of those areas. It's supposed to be roughly twice the resolution, so 1440p. The FOV is going to go from 100° to 120°. And it's supposed to introduce eye tracking for PSVR. 3rd gen will definitely be better, but I think 2nd gen will be a great improvement on a pretty piece of kit.

I play my PSVR all the time. Simply fun and my fave game Rush of Blood is simply amazing!