The only VR I've tried is the Vive (which I bought). I have struggled to put much confidence in the PSVR system. As soon as I heard they were using the PS Move control system with the camera, I became cynical. On top of that, it's a lower resolution and it's running on pretty dated hardware when you're looking at the requirements for VR as well as maintaining decent graphical quality.

I'd like to try it though to see. I'd also like to try a Rift just to see how it looks.

Star Citizen isn't AAA?

What is AAA and why the **** does it even matter? Is it some way of measuring quality before the game is out? Or is it just something console-only players can use to argue it's a pro in console gaming's favour?

Since a mod decided to close my previous thread, I guess I'll post this in here.

So I've kept away from UC4 to avoid spoilers. I had seen a screenshot of Nathan from ages ago and a glimpse of a .gif of a jeep driving part of the game. But now I've said **** it and went and watched someone play the game. I have it on order for rental so I'll get to see it first hand soon. But the video I watched is of good quality. I've also seen screenshots of the game now too. I've seen headlines written, claiming it as a 'technical masterpiece' and I'm now left wonder why?

The animation of the characters and the motion capture is nice. Excellent even. But everything else looks just good. I'm not comparing it to a game on a high end PC either. I'm keeping in mind it's running on a PS4. But even bearing that in mind, the game looks just as I'd expect a PS4 game to look. Nothing is striking me as a technical masterpiece. Particularly puzzling is the use of this term when it's almost never used by the same people to talk about other games.

It's reminding me of 'The Order 1886' getting overwhelming praise. A linear cooridor shooter with film grain, blur, letterboxed resolution and confined level design. I'm failing to see what's so special about Uncharted 4's graphics. I'd say Uncharted 3's graphics were more impressive for a PS3 game than Uncharted 4's are for a PS4 game.

I suppose this isn't the best board for an honest discussion on something like this though. But then neither is NeoGAF.

edit - oh and that motion blur. It's like 'sparingly' isn't in their vocabulary.

So I've kept away from UC4 to avoid spoilers. I had seen a screenshot of Nathan from ages ago and a glimpse of a .gif of a jeep driving part of the game. But now I've said **** it and went and watched someone play the game. I have it on order for rental so I'll get to see it first hand soon. But the video I watched is of good quality. I've also seen screenshots of the game now too. I've seen headlines written, claiming it as a 'technical masterpiece' and I'm now left wonder why?

The animation of the characters and the motion capture is nice. Excellent even. But everything else looks just good. I'm not comparing it to a game on a high end PC either. I'm keeping in mind it's running on a PS4. But even bearing that in mind, the game looks just as I'd expect a PS4 game to look. Nothing is striking me as a technical masterpiece. Particularly puzzling is the use of this term when it's almost never used by the same people to talk about other games.

It's reminding me of 'The Order 1886' getting overwhelming praise. A linear cooridor shooter with film grain, blur, letterboxed resolution and confined level design. I'm failing to see what's so special about Uncharted 4's graphics. I'd say Uncharted 3's graphics were more impressive for a PS3 game than Uncharted 4's are for a PS4 game.

edit - oh and that motion blur. It's like 'sparingly' isn't in their vocabulary.

I liked the other three games. Rented them all and I've just rented the 4th.

I've literally seen like 2 gif images of this game. Kept away from it so far so I look forward to the rare occasion where I play a game without seeing much. I didn't think any of the past 3 games were 10/10 games, let's see if the 4th is.

Ronvalencia AMD thread of 'check out these graphs it proves AMD are amazing'.

I've seen people say they've had more issues with Vive than Rift. I'm sure overall, both tracking methods will be quite similar when both use two cameras/emitters. Vive has a fairly small advantage that its emitters are wireless.

Buy Rift if

• You want a lighter, easier to wear headset
• You want detachable on-ear headphones
• You want overall superior visual quality
• You want a better built-in mic
• You want less hassle with game compatiblity (right now you can use Oculus Home and SteamVR)
• You can wait for what looks like will be the superior controllers (Touch looks way better than Vive's wands)

Buy a Vive if

• You want a camera on the front to see what's in front of you
• You want motion control right now
• You want to utilise a very large play space (about 13x13 feet or more)
• You want a veryslightly larger field of view
• You want unquestionable room-scale compatibility

Most people are not going to drop PC gaming for console gaming. Making the console more powerful means it's still going to be less powerful and doesn't change that it still comes with all the limitations of a console outside of just inferior hardware specs.

I rarely come to these boards but I've noticed ron still posts and it still seems like it did years ago. So I have a question. Does anyone give a shit about what he posts? Ever?