Hacking Switch VR discussion

[TotalInsanity4]

Oh, oops. This is the first time using the ignore function, I completely forgot. No wonder I was confused.

Honestly I don't blame you for using it

 

[Xzi]

The dock only provides extra voltage to the internal GPU so it can upclock itself, it doesn't actually have an external GPU in it. Although, I wouldn't be surprised if that was an option later in its lifespan

Yep, but even then, it would only make output to the TV better, and it would require an HMD (head-mounted display) entirely separate of the main Switch unit to give a boost to virtual reality.

 

[weatMod]

Yep, but even then, it would only make output to the TV better, and it would require an HMD (head-mounted display) entirely separate of the main Switch unit to give a boost to virtual reality.

what about if would remain teatherd to the dock by USB C , would the bus be fast enough to utilize extra power in the dock

 

[Xzi]

what about if would remain teatherd to the dock by USB C , would the bus be fast enough to utilize extra power in the dock

It doesn't matter, the limiting factor on the main Switch unit for VR is its display. 720p is 360p per eye, at which point you might as well be sticking your face back into Virtual Boy. Not to mention: the display needs some method of displaying 90 to 120 FPS, even if that's by some form of re-projection like what PSVR relies on. Increasing the screen resolution to 1080p would cut Switch's battery life in half, if not worse, and the benefit to VR would be minimal as well. Unless you do a tri-subpixel display like PSVR, in which case we're looking at another $100 or $150 or so just for the screen you'd be getting on Switch, no hardware improvements. So yeah, I put Nintendo's chances of pursuing this at 0% to 1%.

 

[smileyhead]

lmao people complaining about 720p being literally unusable for VR, and I'm just sitting here, first experienced VR on my Xperia SP (720p as well), and had no problems with it. you can only see the pixels if you really focus on them.

 

[Xzi]

lmao people complaining about 720p being literally unusable for VR, and I'm just sitting here, first experienced VR on my Xperia SP (720p as well), and had no problems with it. you can only see the pixels if you really focus on them.

I don't presume to know what kind of content phone VR provides, but still I'll guess it isn't great going by what non-VR content is available on the Apple store/Google Play. Certainly not going to be on par with PSVR, and that's a minimum of sorts for proper console VR. Nintendo has no incentive to launch something vastly inferior, and as you mention, in a market where anybody can just buy a cheapo HMD for their phone.

Also, "only seeing the SDE when you focus on it" is what most reviews said about Rift/Vive at launch. Which are 2160x1200. Without supersampling I agree, so I doubt the same can be said of putting 720p an inch or two from your face. Those pixels gotta be huge and the FoV gotta be weak.

 

[BvanBart]

VR on the switch would be awesome. It's the way you use it, now only how crisp it looks.

 

[Xzi]

It's the way you use it, now only how crisp it looks.

If that were the case, Virtual Boy would've been a resounding success. Switch is already essentially two devices in one, I think asking it to do EVERYTHING is a bit much, especially in this form factor. Nintendo just gained sole control over the portable market, and people are expecting them to risk that to compete with better hardware in PSVR? Microsoft isn't even getting into the VR game until they release Scorpio.

Hell, Nintendo VR already exists anyway, in the form of Dolphin VR. Watching Nintendo try and fail to live up to an emulator would only be sad.

 

[Kubas_inko]

Are we latking about VR like Nintendo games VR or using Switch as VR headset (that would be pretty cool)?

 

[Xzi]

Are we latking about VR like Nintendo games VR or using Switch as VR headset (that would be pretty cool)?

Talking about using any PC-compatible HMD to play GCN/Wii games in the Dolphin VR emulator. Something with full motion controls is best of course, so you can play Metroid Prime and the like with 1:1 wiimotes.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

If that were the case, Virtual Boy would've been a resounding success. Switch is already essentially two devices in one, I think asking it to do EVERYTHING is a bit much, especially in this form factor. Nintendo just gained sole control over the portable market, and people are expecting them to risk that to compete with better hardware in PSVR? Microsoft isn't even getting into the VR game until they release Scorpio.

Hell, Nintendo VR already exists anyway, in the form of Dolphin VR. Watching Nintendo try and fail to live up to an emulator would only be sad.

To be fair the Virtual Boy failed because it was a bulky device that had a monochrome display, chewed through batteries and had such awful performance that it regularly gave users eye strain and motion sickness. I'm fairly certain that playing SMW with your face literally pressed against a CRT would be a more pleasant experience

 

[weatMod]

It doesn't matter, the limiting factor on the main Switch unit for VR is its display. 720p is 360p per eye, at which point you might as well be sticking your face back into Virtual Boy. Not to mention: the display needs some method of displaying 90 to 120 FPS, even if that's by some form of re-projection like what PSVR relies on. Increasing the screen resolution to 1080p would cut Switch's battery life in half, if not worse, and the benefit to VR would be minimal as well. Unless you do a tri-subpixel display like PSVR, in which case we're looking at another $100 or $150 or so just for the screen you'd be getting on Switch, no hardware improvements. So yeah, I put Nintendo's chances of pursuing this at 0% to 1%.

like i said i just see them doing it to sell you more hardware, mark my words in 2 or 3 years time you will see it
it will basically be a totally new system ,maybe utilizing an X2 based chip ,you will just be able to use the old joycons and the dock with it
and it most likely will need to be teathered so battery will not be an issue ,it will be able to utilize full power for whatever processor it runs because it won't run on battery , PSVR is teathered to the PSVR processing box so battery is not an issue

and i would not rule out Nintendo also having a new dock with a built in processing unit or an add on for the current dock

pretty much the only thing that will make it a switch will be back compatibility with current switch games ,joycons and dock.

the industry is trending towards mid life cycle hardware refreshes and i certainly do not see Nintendo bucking this trend
for the very reason that so much of their business has relied on selling new hardware especially in their handheld division

if Sony can do it i do not see why Nintendo can't.
of course they are going to be selling you a bunch of new more expensive hardware to do it
i don't know why this is looked at as a downside for Nintendo , they want to sell you hardware

Sony did it a year ago so if Nintendo does it in 2 or 3 years time it will be a lot cheaper for them than it was for Sony ,having 3 or 4 more years
of new hardware generations driving prices down for the processor and screen
and of course we know Nintendo will probably use something old ,as old and as cheap as they can get away with just like 3DS running at 240
they love to make use of old hardware (also resistive touch screens are ancient and they used them in the 3DS ( not that i think a capacitive screen would not have been worse option for several reasons) )

also they might be trying to form a partnership with a display technology manufacturer like they did with nvidia for the switch processor
have a batch of custom proprietary displays commissioned like they did with the switch and it's processor

2 ways to cut costs, one is to do it like they did with the 3ds and just use old legacy hardware and two is to try and work a deal like they did with nvidia to get custom parts

but you really just never know with Nintendo , it just seems to me that those joycons are deliberately designed to be used as VR controllers
seems like there is more to their plan than just selling you a shitty tech demo as full title like they did with the ridiculously overpriced 1,2,switch

also remember that Nintendo makes the majority of it's profits off of it's dedicated base of fan boys so if they only have one hardware iteration of the switch then those fan boys only have to spend once to buy the single hardware unit

now if those same people will buy anything because it is Nintendo and fan boys were offered new models then they would certainly be opening their wallets once again
just like they did with the 3DS ,i think there is enough money to be made of these types of people for Nintendo to consider it
the fan boy who bought a launch day switch will not have to spend any more money the whole console generation
but if they were to make a couple more hardware iterations then that is more money for Nintendo

i can see it maybe being a sort of stepping stone, next iteration will be higher def screen then after that they sell you the VR base unit with extra processor
and the headset adapter

 

[Xzi]

To be fair the Virtual Boy failed because it was a bulky device that had a monochrome display, chewed through batteries and had such awful performance that it regularly gave users eye strain and motion sickness. I'm fairly certain that playing SMW with your face literally pressed against a CRT would be a more pleasant experience

Well that's the thing: a lot of these are the same problems we'd have with Switch VR. It's meant to be a portable console, but you add a bulky headset to it and it's not so much anymore. Performance would be pretty bad since portable Switch is meant to output 720p low settings, and rendering VR games puts about four times the amount of strain on the system. So the graphics on these games would look extremely dated, think N64, and that's even before you put your face next to it. On top of that, the battery would drain in like thirty minutes. Last but not least: neither the main Switch unit nor the joy cons are designed to track accurately in a full 3D space. If turning your head causes a delayed camera motion in the game, and representations of your hands are all over the place, you would get sick. Even I'd get sick, and I'm immune to motion sickness in Vive.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

Well that's the thing: a lot of these are the same problems we'd have with Switch VR. It's meant to be a portable console, but you add a bulky headset to it and it's not so much anymore.

Eh, the Switch is pretty light all things considered, and if a headset were made ergonomically it should be fine. Much better than setting a stand onto a table and craning your neck, anyway

Performance would be pretty bad since portable Switch is meant to output 720p low settings, and rendering VR games puts about four times the amount of strain on the system. So the graphics on these games would look extremely dated, think N64, and that's even before you put your face next to it.

That's a given, but I don't think Nintendo would try to compete with flagship VR experiences. Mobile VR already exists and works pretty decently

On top of that, the battery would drain in like thirty minutes.

I agree there. If it happened, games would have to be made in a way they could either be played in short bursts or the unit would have to tether to a power source[/quote]

Last but not least: neither the main Switch unit nor the joy cons are designed to track accurately in a full 3D space. If turning your head causes a delayed camera motion in the game, and representations of your hands are all over the place, you would get sick.

Not true. Full 3D head tracking could be added to the head unit and the Joycon are already very capable of motion tracking. Position tracking could potentially be added via a slide-on accessory, as well

 

[weatMod]

what VR isn't teathered to a power source? PSVR is

i can see it maybe doing some AR stuff unteathered ,but then for VR needing to be teathered
AR is far less demanding , but the current switch has no cameras
so again here come the new hardware iterations with dual cameras on the back of the unit

 

[Xzi]

what VR isn't teathered to a power source? PSVR is

i can see it maybe doing some AR stuff unteathered ,but then for VR needing to be teathered
AR is far less demanding , but the current switch has no cameras
so again here come the new hardware iterations with dual cameras on the back of the unit

Exactly, it would have to be a new hardware revision, and Nintendo isn't going to do that solely for the purpose of adding VR. They've already tried VR and they've already tried stationary box consoles. Don't forget that Switch is more a follow-up to Wii U anyway, their home console line.

So yeah, VR maybe for Switch X2. That way they can add in all the hardware necessary for VR, like proper motion tracking and a subpixel-heavy screen. Forgetting even price, I don't think the current Switch model has any more room for extra hardware.

That's a given, but I don't think Nintendo would try to compete with flagship VR experiences. Mobile VR already exists and works pretty decently

Nintendo wants to distance themselves from the mobile market with Switch, though, not confuse people on its relative power.

Not true. Full 3D head tracking could be added to the head unit and the Joycon are already very capable of motion tracking. Position tracking could potentially be added via a slide-on accessory, as well

There's a reason every other HMD uses external trackers in addition to the headset and controllers, they're a necessity for accurate motion tracking right now. Neither the main Switch unit nor the joy cons are capable of tracking their own position in 3D space. The joy cons have gyros and accelerometers I believe, so they do know when they're being moved and in what direction and how fast, but they don't know their actual position, which is a necessity in VR.