It seems we’re closer to seeing a viable workaround that could allow PSVR 2 owners to play PC VR games. iVRy, the most promising project dedicated to the task, is making good headway by unlocking the headset’s outer cameras for room-scale tracking.

The effort to hack PSVR 2 was initially put on hold earlier this year, which was understandably a let-down for anyone hoping to play PC VR-exclusive titles such as Half-Life: Alyx (2020), or social apps like Bigscreen or VRChat.

The indefinite pause on development didn’t last for long though, as earnest efforts resumed shortly afterwards when the project opened a Patreon to help support development.

In a recent tweet, iVRy creator Mediator Software outlined some new milestones reached after 143 days of development, which were unlocked recently by gaining access to PSVR 2’s camera. As a result, the project now has access to the headset’s 6DOF SLAM tracking, 3DOF IMU tracking, proximity sensor, raw stereo camera data, and distortion-corrected passthrough stereo camera data.

Mediator Software says they’re now focused on “understanding the PSVR2 data and putting in code in the driver to interpret it.”

And by now it’s pretty clear Sony isn’t making it simple. The creator says in a recent tweet the project has cost “over $13K in equipment and software to date, as well as hundreds of hours of work.” That includes things like custom sniffer boards and emulator boards.

While the iVRy creator has successfully booted up 6DOF PC VR content on PSVR 2 in the lab, baking that functionality into a future software release that’s broadly accessible will be a big challenge.

SEE ALSO
How to Watch Meta Connect to See All Things Quest, AR & More, Kicking Off Today @1PM ET

“Any use of the software requires an [hardware] adapter that doesn’t exist yet, so an early access version of the software wouldn’t be usable by anyone at all,” the creator says. “There may be some kind of limited run (maybe 100) of the reference adapters that we’re making, which may be offered via Patreon.”

To boot, work on PSVR 2’s optically-tracked Sense controllers have only just begun, with the studio noting that reverse engineering the controllers is “not going to be easy at all.”

“Working on controllers at this point, means that there is nothing further we can do with the headset part right now, not that there is nothing further we can or need to do with the headset part at all. There is still a lot that needs to be done there, including lots of unknowns,” the creator said.

So, while we’re closer than ever, we may still be waiting for some time on that ‘one-and-done’ software download that could potentially uncouple PSVR 2 from PS5 for good. In the meantime, the bulk of the projects updates are published through the project’s Patreon, which offers a $10 minimum monthly membership. You can also follow along via iVRy’s Twitter for the broader strokes.

Newsletter graphic

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. More information.


Scott Hayden
Well before the first modern XR products hit the market, Scott recognized the potential of the technology and set out to understand and document its growth. He has been professionally reporting on the space for nearly a decade as Editor at Road to VR, authoring more than 4,000 articles on the topic. Scott brings that seasoned insight to his reporting from major industry events across the globe.
  • ViRGiN

    They never said that?

    • I forget where, exactly.
      But it was said like just PSVR2 was released.
      Like the same week maybe even.

      • ViRGiN

        So you’re talking bullshit then.
        But hey, i remember valve saying they dont give a F about VR, so cope with that.
        VALVE SHILL!

        • Oh fuck off, you fucking retard …. lol
          I never agreed with all the other people insulting you
          because I thought while you were [sometimes] needlessly
          abusive, you made valid and salient points about virtual reality.

          But now I see that the other people are right.
          VR is all of our passions here, obviously.
          But dude, you SEVERELY sound like you need some feminine company.
          Or masculine, if that’s your thing.

          God forbid I don’t remember where I saw an article about a VR system
          I care NOTHING about that I saw in passing from SEVEN MONTHS AGO.
          Idiot …. lol

  • ViRGiN

    NO DISPLAYPORT = NO BUY !!!

  • Christian Schildwaechter

    TL;DR: Very interesting progress, thanks to Sony not even trying to lock it down, the PSVR 2 being rather standard compliant and doing a lot of tracking onboard. This should make it possible to use the PSVR 2 as a 6DoF HMD similar to a Quest 2 or Rift, but the features that make the PSVR 2 special like haptics, HDR and eye tracking are still far off and will be much harder to utilize. And ETFR with huge performance gains is still very unlikely to ever become usable despite the sensor data being readable, as the matching tracking software on the PC side is missing.

    Not to diminish iVRy’s efforts and progress, but they aren’t “hacking” anything. They are finding out how the PSVR 2 talks to the P5 by listening to the data steams and sending test data to the HMD, basically re-engineering the protocols. So far there is no need to hack anything, because Sony didn’t encrypt anything, they just didn’t publish the documentation.

    To quote myself from the discussion in January, when iVRy still dampened hope the PSVR 2 could ever be made to work with a PC:

    In the best case scenario where the basic tracking is done on a SoC on the PSVR 2, sending back just the readable results via USB-2, and Sony hasn’t scrambled/encrypted the protocol, this could make it rather easy to utilize at least the basic 6DoF functionality.

    That’s pretty much what turned out to be true, with the main change being that the PSVR 2 uses USB-C VirtualLink Alt mode instead of USB-C DisplayPort Alt mode, adding some power and allowing to send back data at USB3 instead of USB 2 speed, and requiring extra hardware adapters to connect it to a PC. Basically the PSVR 2 does a lot of the tracking onboard and then sends the positional/rotational data back to the PS5 for the next frame to be rendered. iVRy now managed to find and interpret the tracking data, so it can be send to e.g. an OpenXR stack.

    Analyzing protocols is a PITA and at the high speeds of USB-C requires expensive equipment, but the result is still using what was already openly there, not getting/hacking it to do something new. So far pretty much everything speculated regarding PSVR 2 standard compliance, protocols used and Sony not bothering to encrypt it or locking away the sensors turned out to be true, it was just hard to verify and understand how exactly it works.

    We are still seeing pretty much the best case, and the hard part has yet to come. Quoting myself again:

    But even if Sony encrypts nothing, you can access all the sensors over USB and Sony even publishes the full specs and all the needed documentation free for everyone, you still don’t have anything that could do inside-out, controller, hand or eye tracking on a PC. It would be like a HTC Vive Pro Eye without the Tobii eye tracking software and without the HTC software stack that makes it OpenVR/OpenXR compliant. Some kind of controller tracking shouldn’t be too hard to implement for a third party, but WMR has taught us that some tracking doesn’t equal usable tracking, and everything else will be much more complicated. […] Your chances to find any type of usable eye tracking that allows to use a HMD like the PSVR 2 as an OpenXR device, or something that supports the haptics are pretty much zero, because this stuff is really hard.

    The (somewhat expected) good news is that the PSVR 2 SoC already does the inside-out tracking for the HMD. Expected, because this is done even on the Quest 1 by the DSP section of the SoC that takes up ~10% of the silicon, to unburden CPU/GPU and make them fully available for OS and apps. I’d fully expect the PSVR 2 SoC to also do all of the controller tracking they are currently trying to figure out, because doing this lightweight tasks on the HMD make a lot more sense then sending back multiple video streams to the PS5 for analysis. Once this is figured out, the PSVR 2 can be used as a 2000*2040/eye 6DoF HMD similar to a Rift or Quest connected to a PC, which will be a big step.

    Still lacking would be a way to control the haptics, and if this is figured out, a way to make them usable in existing games/apps. Given that nothing so far has been actively hidden, I’d expect these to be readable/writable too, with the main problem to identify the right parts and then translate it. The PSVR Sense controllers use LRAs/VCAs, basically low frequency speakers that move a mass instead of a membrane in one dimension, while current controllers use ERMs, small motors rotating a mass in two dimensions. LRAs expect a signal similar to a sound wave, you’d have to create a translation layer, and no apps would use the haptics in the HMD itself because no other HMDs have offered these.

    The biggest problem is what people want most: eye tracking and foveated rendering. From all we know this is very hard and compute intensive, so it is very likely that the PSVR 2 itself at most calculates pupil position and defers the motion estimation needed for ETFR to the PS5. This would have to be completely reimplemented. And considering that Sony gave up on their inhouse development and instead partnered with Tobii for integration and licensing the eye tracking software they have been working on for 20 years, this won’t be easy. If all you want is the gaze direction, just accessing the eye tracking cameras and some minor image processing will get you there. You can add that level of eye tracking with the open source EyeTrackVR and about USD 25 in cheap SoCs and cameras from AliExpress, allowing your VRChat avatar to look someone in the eye.

    Again, it is great that iVRy stuck to the project, did all the work, and (thanks to Sony not bothering with locking anything) is already very far on the way to make the PSVR 2 a usable 6DoF PCVR HMD, at roughly 167% the price of a Quest 2 with a slightly higher resolution. That may make it attractive to those that don’t want to buy two HMDs or already have a PSVR 2, but it still would make little sense to buy a PSVR 2 just for PCVR. And it will be very hard to get there, with there simply being no software that currently could utilize haptics or eye tracking. And even functionality like HDR that would work out of the box due to the HMD just identifying itself as a display using DP1.4 with DSC to squeeze high pixel and color counts through USB-C will remain unused, unless someone hacks pseudo-HDR into ReShade or other HMDs and software stacks will start to support it too. ETFR and its matching performance gains will be almost impossible to get due to lack of freely available tracking/motion estimation software, even if the feature would be basically supported by OpenXR.

    Remember that the PSVR 1 support by iVRy also basically only allowed using the easily accessible 3DoF tracking data from the IMU, everything else like controller or 6DoF tracking had to be reimplemented, causing the setup to be, lets say, challenging, and till today only allowing for sort of 5DoF, tracking up and down and sideways head movements, but not forward and backwards. And even that took a very long time to implement. The work iVRy is doing is great and important, and the fact that they got access to the raw stereo camera feed is tempting even me go get a PSVR 2, as this is prohibited on pretty much all other HMDs for data privacy reasons, making AR experiments impossible. But do not expect the PSVR 2 to (ever) provide all the advanced features it offers when connected to a PS5 to PCVR users too, or for it to ever become plug’n’play without active support from Sony.

    • AndroidGuy

      PSVR 2 uses DP Alt Mode, not Virtua Link.

      The problem is that the EDID doesn’t report that it supports DSC compression so you have to force it through, and won’t work by default the way most DSC displays do or should. Hence the need for some hacking. Most people consider reverse engineering something to be “hacking” btw, while we’re being pedantic.

      • Christian Schildwaechter

        The info about VirtualLink came from iVRy a couple of months ago, though that may have been a misunderstanding. Both are nearly identical Alt modes of USB-C, using the four superspeed cable pairs to send unidirectional DP signals, up to DP 2.0 on USB 4. On the PSVR 2 it uses DP 1.4, which is basically DP 1.3 with stream compression. DP 1.3 offers pretty much exactly the bandwidth needed to feed a dual 2000*2040@120Hz RGB24 display, DSC should only be needed if HDR with higher bandwidth requirements is enabled.

        VirtualLink allows exactly the same DP 1.4, but offers up to 27W instead of 15W to power the HMD, and, most importantly, upgrades the A/B 6/7 back channel from USB 2.0 to USB 3.1. This is the only part where the difference between VirtualLink and DP Alt mode would matter for the PSVR 2, as USB 2.0 does not have enough bandwidth to send back multiple video streams for analysis on the PS5. So using DP Alt mode would mean the SoC in the PSVR 2 has to do most of the tracking work and only sends back results, which would make it much more feasible to use the PSVR 2 with a PC. If VirtualLink/USB 3.1 is available, the higher bandwidth would allow to shift a lot more computation to the PS5, making PCVR support possibly harder, as more of the tracking functionality would have to be reimplemented.

        As far as I understood the (wrong) EDID data missing the actually required DSC feature required patching the display driver to basically ignore the EDID metadata and enable DP DSC nonetheless, which is why it at least initially only worked on Linux with FOSS GPU drivers. Which I would consider hacking, as it enables a functionality that previously wasn’t available by circumventing/overwriting an internal check to compensate for the broken metadata.

        Connecting the PSVR 2 to a PC with the intended protocols intended isn’t hacking, it’s just using the regular function. The PSVR 2 doesn’t really care or check if it is connected to a PS5 or PC, as long as you use the protocols properly, it will work. It’s more like figuring out how a washing machine works, when the buttons aren’t labeled and you have no manual, but that’s learning how to use it, not hacking it for extra/new/changed functionality.

        • PSVR2 does 2-way ECDH authentication over USB. It uses 2-lane DisplayPort with USB3, which is standard alt-DP. It needs 12V PD, which is pretty much only found on VirtualLink implementations. DP-AUX is not EDID. DSC capability reporting is done over DP-AUX.

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            I’m aware that (DP-)AUX is a data channel and EDID a VESA defined set of metadata that can sent via a channel like DDC or USB or DP-AUX. I didn’t know that PSVR 2 needs 12V, but am familiar with the problem that the USB-PD 2.0 spec removed 12V and only requires 5V, 9V, 15V and 20V, causing problems with some USB-PD-12V adapters that expect the power plug to still support the now optional voltage. I’d imagine it should be possible to negotiate for 15V from the PS5 USB-C port and then convert down to 12V, but I don’t know enough about the details of USB-PD negotiation to estimate the required effort.

            What confuses me immensely is your statement that the PSVR 2 “uses 2-lane DisplayPort with USB3, which is standard alt-DP”. Limiting DP to two lanes would leave open two of the USB superspeed lanes and allow for much more bandwidth back than the USB2 speed AUX channels. But AFAIK the RDNA 2 based PS5 APU will only support up to DP 1.4. This means that each lane is limited to a raw bandwidth of 8.1Gbit/s, or 16.2Gbit/s for two lanes. But you need an actual data transfer of 2*2000*2040*24*120 = 23.5Gbit/s for the two PSVR displays at 120Hz RGB24 without DSC. DP is 8b/10b encoded, so you need to add 25%, resulting in a total raw bandwidth requirement of 29.376Gbit/s.

            That is technically impossible with two DP 1.3/1.4 lanes, you need a full four line configuration that gives you 32.4GBit/s bandwidth/25.92Gbit/s data transfer, which would occupy all four superspeed lines and only leave the AUX channel(s) to transfer data back. For HDR/RBG30 this isn’t even sufficient, you’d need to activate DSC.

            Are you sure that the PSVR 2 uses 2-lane DP even when running at 120Hz? This should only be possible if either the PS5 only sends 60Hz, which could be pulled up to 120Hz with some trickery on the PSVR 2 onboard SoC, or transfers a significantly lower resolution that gets upscaled on the HMD. And since there are VR games running at full 120Hz on PSVR 2 and upscaling would lead to a very noticeable image quality reduction, I cannot see how it should be possible to keep an USB-3 backchannel open at the same time unless they adapted that part of the VirtualLink Alt mode, using shielded cable pairs for the USB-C-AUX channels, allowing them to run at USB 3.1 instead of the standard USB 2.0 speed.

            So unless I am overlooking something very fundamental, just from what the specs allow, the DP 1.3/1.4 RDNA 2 PSVR 2 could not run 2-lane DisplayPort with USB 3 (which would be standard DP Alt mode) at 120Hz native resolution. At the full resolution/refresh rate, it has to be either 4-lane DP Alt with USB 2.0 over AUX or 4-lane VirtualLink Alt with USB 3.1 over AUX. The 12V requirement hints at the latter, though Sony could of course have deviated from both standard in some way.

            All this would be rather academic, if it wouldn’t significantly influence how much of the tracking has to be done onboard the PSVR 2 due to the significant bandwidth limits of USB 2 compared to USB 3.1, and therefore how much of the tracking can be “re-used” instead of having to reimplement it. [I’m aware that the USB-C-AUX channels aren’t really USB 2, and that only one is usually used. I have no idea how the slower DP-AUX channel is mapped to these and if this is even defined in the USB-C standard for DP or VirtualLink Alt mode.]

          • PSVR2 uses 2 lanes of DP (1.4), using HBR3 and DSC to reach 4000×2040@120Hz, and 5Gbps USB3. It cannot and will not work in VR mode without DSC (1.1). It doesn’t use USB2 at all and in fact some of the PSVR2 connectors are missing those pins altogether. DP-AUX runs over SBU1/SBU2. Yes, I am sure of all of this having built “sniffer” boards to break out various signals on the USB-C cable, and having used those and various analysers to get where we are today.

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            The problem of the limited 2-lane bandwidth remains, and the 4-lane DP bandwidth was particularly set so it would allow for 4K@120Hz. The sole remaining explanation I could come up with would be a very high DSC compression rate with HBR3. Technically it should allow for up to 3:1, though the most common application seems to be for 4K@120Hz HDR, which increases bandwidth requirements only by about 25%. So for that a DSC compression rate of 1.25:1 is sufficient, which leads to basically no visible artifacts, while a 2-lane 4K@120Hz HDR configuration would need 2.5:1. The max DSC compression in actual use I had heard of so far was 2:1 to drive 8K@60Hz over DP1.4.

            I of course have no way to check any of this beyond doing the math based on the specs, but Sony using a 2-lane DP 1.4 config to drive a 4K@120Hz display puts there implementation somewhere between unusual and very strange. The reasoning would have to be that they absolutely needed the USB3 data channel to be able to send multiple video streams for tracking and passthrough back to the PS5, DP only allowing for 1, 2 or 4, but not 3 lane configurations, them not wanting to require more expensive VirtualLink cables/hardware that would allow for both 4-lane DP and USB3 and/or staying compliant to standard DP Alt mode, possibly due to limits of the AMD APU.

            A lot of thanks for all your effort, analysis, testing, and all your answers. I’m still somewhat irritated about the implementation, but since nobody seems to complain about annoying compression artifacts, a DSC ratio of 2.5:1 seems to work for the PSVR 2.

          • USB3 needs 2 of the available 4 lanes (Rx + Tx).

    • david vincent

      “at about 167% the price of a Quest 2 with a slightly higher resolution”
      And with more clarity and less latency, thanks to uncompressed image

  • Mike

    AVP? Alien vs Predator?

  • Dragon Marble

    But why would anyone want this? I bought the PSVR2 for the games. There are already so many choices for hardware on PC, ranging from the smallest (form factor) to the widest (FOV) to the highest (resolution). The most interesting features of PSVR2 (haptics and HDR) are not going to work without game support anyway. If you ask me, the best all-around PCVR headset is the Quest Pro.

    • ViRGiN

      redditors are upset with Meta not specifically making displayport connection on their standalone headsets, so potentially any other headset that can be dogleashed to a PC without “compression and latency” is potentially a win for PCVR people who need yet another headset to play beat saber.

    • Christian Schildwaechter

      Well, for someone already owning a PSVR 2 like you, it will cost them almost nothing besides some adapters to also use it with a PC compared to USD 999 for buying an extra Quest Pro. That’s a pretty good reason for someone in a similar situation to want this, even without ETFR, haptics and HDR support.

      And while the Quest Pro offers 500 mini LED background lighting zones for better contrast, that’t not the same as an OLED display with native HDR capabilities. HDR on PSVR 2 is one of the features that could be made workable with reasonable effort for PCVR, as it is part of the DP 1.4 protocol used for display, so it should work with any HDR capable GPU. There are currently no other HDR capable PCVR HMDs besides the Varjo XR/VR-3 and Pimax Crystal, with the first only supporting HDR on the center microdisplay, and the latter seemingly only supporting either low-persistence or high brightness for HDR, but not both at the same time. Consequently there are no VR games utilizing it.

      But there are quite a lot of PC games with HDR support, and many of these like RE8 come with mod support for PCVR. It should be possible to enable HDR support in these mods when talking to the PSVR 2, which would make it the currently most attractive option for HDR PCVR. And that won’t change for some time, as the pancake optics in new headsets are very inefficient, requiring much brighter displays. There simply are no HDR capable OLED microdisplays bright enough to be used with pancake lenses, restricting (usable) VR HDR to the Fresnel based PSVR 2 for the foreseeable future.

      • Dragon Marble

        Valid points. PSVR2’s HDR is an interesting topic, though. My understanding is that Sony achieved it by simply increasing the persistence of the display. Brad Lynch showed on YouTube that a PSVR2 running at 0% brightness works just like any other headset: no HDR, but also not blurry. Does that mean that, technically, any headset (including the Quest Pro) can be turned into “HDR” through a firmware update?

        • Christian Schildwaechter

          TL;DR: You need a HDR capable GPU, display and a display technology that allows for both high brightness and high contrast, so a firmware update isn’t enough. The Quest Pro has neither of these, but can “emulate” a HDR display very closely thanks to its backlight with individually controlled brightness zones and clever software.

          No, you need a display controller that can show more than 8bit per color, a matching image source and a way to transport that. Many desktop GPUs already support HDR with 10bit per color and ways to transfer it via HDMI or DP. AFAIK the Adreno GPU in the XR2 Gen 1/SD 865 in the Quest Pro doesn’t, as “HDR Gaming with 10bit color” is one of the new features that differentiates SD8 Gen 1 from its predecessor SD888. Older Snapdragons support HDR for video recording and decoding, but cannot display it on the device. A Quest 3 based on XR2 Gen 2/SD8 Gen 2 should be able to drive a HDR display.

          If you have all that, you can only display all the information in the HDR image, but you need a matching screen that allows actually seen it. The extra bits in HDR images are used for very small color changes, basically it allows for much darker dark colors and much brighter bright colors. For everything in between HDR doesn’t provide a lot of visual improvement, there it mostly helps with reducing losses during image processing.

          To even be able to see both the extra dark and bright shades at the same time, you need a very bright display with a very high contrast ratio. Both upper and lower limits are determined by the display technology.

          In the Quest 2, a LCD sits in front of a white backlight and filters the unwanted colors of the white spectrum to only show red, green and blue. Max brightness depends on the brightness of the backlight, and e.g the AVP uses Sony display modules with two stacked white backlights for added brightness, which is a) complicated, b) causing a lot of defects and c) one of the reasons for the high price. Though further increasing brightness is therefore possible, the LC color filters aren’t perfect, so the brighter the backlight, the grayer black parts turn, making the finely grained dark shades of HDR invisible.

          The Quest Pro improves this in two ways: for one it uses a Quantum dot backlight, meaning it doesn’t generate colors from the whole white spectrum that later have to be filtered out by the LC, but instead only rather small frequency bands around red, green and blue, significantly improving the effectiveness of the filters and therefore allowing for more contrast and darker colors with the same max brightness. And instead of one large backlight, it is separated into 500 different zones, the brightness of each can be controlled separately. This uses the fact that in most images the very bright and very dark parts aren’t located close to each other, and if they were, we wouldn’t be able to see the dark parts.

          This way it is possible to display a dark segment of ~90*90 pixels much darker than a bright segment somewhere else thanks to the smaller lighting zones. The backlights sort of adds extra brightness bits to the actual color resolution of display at a lower brightness resolution. [That’s not ideal, our eyes are more sensitive to brightness than color, and many video encodings combine a high brightness resolution with a much lower color resolution, with little perceived visual difference, but offering a massive bandwidth reduction.]

          Combined with software that can analyze a HDR image source, this allows to show the full bit depth of the signal with the full color resolution mostly accurate for typical images even on a non-HDR capable LCD. Not sure how computationally expensive this is, as you need a brightness analysis for each frame, determining the best background brightness level for each 90*90 pixel block and then change the individual color value of each pixel in each block so that combined with the backlight it shows the correct color.

          Doing the same on an OLED display is much easier, as there is no backlight or color filter, each pixel is self-illuminating and can be turned completely off, allowing for very dark shades. On the other hand OLED are limited by how much light each single diode can generate, and currently that’s much, much less than regular LEDs, limiting the use of OLED with power hungry optics like pancake lenses that lose up to 90% of the light in their optical path with multiple internal reflections/refractions. On the plus side you can fully control every pixel very precisely from off to max brightness, making them very suitable for HDR displays without any of the complex image processing of the LCD with Quantum dot zoned backlights.

          What everybody is aiming for are micro-LED, where the light emitting diodes are placed directly on a silicon backplane. LED are much more durable and brighter than OLED, while still providing their advantages of not needing another light source or color filters and allowing to show everything from completely dark to max brightness. Since only the required colors are produced, they should also be more energy efficient than LCD, who by default filter out most of the generated light.

          Mass-production of micro-LED is still a problem, but in a couple of years they will most likely replace other display technologies in VR. According to Bloomberg, Apple for the first time has started to work on inhouse displays based on micro-LED, while so far they have bought all their displays. For an endless rabbit hole leading down the path of XR optics and displays, see Karl Guttag’s kguttag_com site.

    • Ookami

      if you got an unlimited budget, go ham. but if you just spent $500 on a psvr2 headset, and you also have a pc, being able to use a single headset for both is a great option.

    • david vincent

      The best PCVR headset has no display port ? Yeah sure…

  • Andrew Jakobs

    When did Sony said the PSVR2 could not be hacked? They never said that.

    • ViRGiN

      they never said that, but i’m giving you a thumbs down anyway, cause you’re POS.

      • Ookami

        lmao you’re just mad you’re getting downvotes on all your takes.

        • ViRGiN

          oh i see you’re still waiting for valve deckard

          • Ookami

            Deflection: literally the only kind of response you know of. Oh, that and ad hominem.

          • ViRGiN

            Broken record

          • Ookami

            “broken record” is more of a self-burn than anything else when it’s in the context of you being called out for the same thing for the umpteenth time.

          • ViRGiN

            Your history shows your just obsessed with my comments

          • Ookami

            If you were wasting your time reading through all my comment history than you’d know I’m only engaging with your comments because its amusing to me. though tbh it’s starting to get old

          • ViRGiN

            i understand. if you find it amusing, that’s fine. but i don’t want to overstay my welcome or become repetitive. let me know if you want to discuss something else or take a break.

          • Yes and yes.
            I’m no shrink, but this dude is SEVERELY fucked in the head.

          • ViRGiN

            LMAO, YOU ARE HATED JUST A TINY BIT LESS THAN I AM BECAUSE YOU ARE ACTUALLY PRO VALVE. COPE.

    • Of course they said that.
      Use yer head.

    • Sony does not enter into any conversation about PSVR2 being used on other platforms. At all. Who knows what their strategy is, but it appears to be:
      – Block any possible “accidental” use of PSVR2 on other platforms, so that PSVR2 use on other platforms can in no way be construed as being possible or intentional.
      – Don’t mention PSVR2 on other platforms at all ever to avoid bringing attention to the possibility.

      • ApocalypseShadow

        And why would they? They are trying to sell PS5 consoles, accessories, games and make royalties on 3rd party content by being the store front. That’s where they make their money.

        Sony most likely invested millions into PS VR 2. If they profit from it like PSVR, they will invest in making PS VR 2 games, collaborate with 3rd parties in bringing more games to the platform like PSVR got with Astrobot, Blood and Truth, Wipeout, Skyrim, Hitman, Borderlands, etc.

        PC already had multiple options. Wireless options. The potential to cut into Sony’s investment that also leads to high fidelity multiplatform development will hurt console VR and cut down the potential games coming to PC. Leaving PC VR gamers to continue getting hand me down ports from Quest headsets that don’t take advantage of PC hardware.

        I just don’t see the point. No games av available on PC for it, no AAA developer will ever make games for it on PC, modders won’t be taking advantage of Sony’s headset features. There’s no real point but just making it compatible and hurting Sony’s sales. Sales they might be using to offer the development and cost to produce the thing in the future place.

        It’s not going to bring anything new to PC. High end already exists with Index and Pimax. Wireless already exists with Pico and Quest. No real point when Sony makes no VR games for PC.

        • Exactly. It is in answer to a question (and all those other boring ones around “will Sony make PC drivers for PSVR2?”).

          You don’t see the point, because you don’t understand that there are *MANY* people who can/want to only buy a single headset and use it for PS5 and PCVR. It’s the classic fallacy of “if I don’t want it then nobody does”.

          The rest of your reply seems to miss the point that all PCVR titles would be playable on it if it had a SteamVR driver.

          Hurt Sony? Even if a PC driver was available, I very much doubt more than 0.5% of all PSVR2 owners would be using it on PC. And probably 1% of that 0.5% wouldn’t also be using it on PS5. It’s more likely (but also not very) to help Sony, in that some PS5 owners on the fence about purchasing PSVR2 might also purchase it if it had the potential for additional value (even if they never took advantage of that).

        • ViRGiN

          agreed with everything but “high end already exists with index and pimax”. That’s not a high end at all.

  • Not bad for a team that at the start of the project said they would have needed years to make it work…

  • ApocalypseShadow

    Either post where they said it, being that you have access to Google. Or stop lying and spreading nonsense.

    • Fuck off, stupid, I’m not doing your work for you.
      I give two flying fucks about PSVR.
      Why don’t YOU use this “google” thing or whatever.

      • ViRGiN

        I googled your username instead, and what came out was tweeter of your boy sadly where you kindly ask him to make even more videos lol!

  • ApocalypseShadow

    Totally a waste of time but they are definitely cashing in on the supposed attempt. That Patreon must be raking in the money.

    Multiple headsets big and small, expensive and cheap on PC already. But some gamers want Sony’s headset because it’s the only high end headset PC gamers don’t have access to. Pure entitlement. Want to use it, buy a PS5.

    Buying the device to use it on PC doesn’t help Sony at all. Only companies like Valve. If gamers don’t buy VR games on PS5, Sony won’t be making money and get a return on their investment on the headset. No profit means no higher quality games created by them or 3rd parties. If it’s successful, some of these non exclusive games will get ported cross platform. No PS VR 2, no higher fidelity games for PC. You’ll be killing the very platform you’re trying to support when it’s already supported with dozens of VR headsets. Including wireless. And killing console VR in the process.

    Then, PC gamers will be stuck back to the same Quest ports as hand me downs. Where the games take no advantage of PC power. And still waiting for modders like pray dog to push Unreal Engine support.

    Use the device for what it was intended for. Sony spent the money making an affordable headset for console. But PC gamers want to ruin that by using it on PC instead. Is the Index, Pimax, Reverb, Quest and Pico not good enough?

    • Ookami

      maybe some people would rather not buy several vr headsets just to play on different platforms. They’re catering to a niche, but that niche exists. No one is telling you to use it.

    • Totally killing it. Maybe one day I’ll get 10% of what I’ve spent back from Patreon.

      • Christian Schildwaechter

        I really hope you will, though that is probably rather hard with what is effectively a niche product inside a niche inside a tiny niche. At least you should end up with a rather well equipped lab, a lot of hard-earned knowledge that will hopefully also be applicable elsewhere, and the certainty that you helped VR and many VR users to push through the dark ages.

        • ViRGiN

          Yeah, making his work only accessible to him certainly helps the VR through the dark ages!

          Dude sells his work. He is after money. Not community.

    • Christian Schildwaechter

      Buying the device to use it on PC doesn’t help Sony at all.

      Based on the included hardware/features, the PSVR 2 costs significantly less to produce than the USD 599 Sony is selling it for. They will make some profit from every PSVR 2 sold to a PCVR users. So buying the device to use it on PC does indeed help Sony, though they would clearly prefer for you to also buy a PS5 and lots of games for it, as the percentage they get from software sales plus DLC and micro-transactions is where they make basically all their money, the hardware plays only a minor part.

      Nonetheless, buying a PSVR 2 for PCVR doesn’t hurt Sony, instead they benefit in several ways, as every sold PSVR 2 provides them with some profit and also helps driving down the production costs of PSVR 2 through economy of scale. Plus every PCVR user already owning a PSVR 2 is more likely to later also buy a PS5 for the exclusive titles, the much smoother setup and/or to fully utilize all of the advanced features that will only work in combination with the console.

  • Ookami

    we went from “it’s going to be very hard” to “It’s almost impossibly hard” to “6doff tracking and display working”. The twists and turns. This new development is pretty exciting (even if I don’t own a psvr2 headset)

  • ViRGiN

    This is the third time you are blocking me, only to unblock some days later. Who cares?

    People like you need to block people cause it shatters their fragile world and ego lol. OH NOES SOMEONE SHAT ON MUH VALVE!