PlayStation VR Will Be $549 In Australia (But You'll Probably Need $650)

We've just gotten confirmation that the Australian pricing for PlayStation VR is $549.95.

We'll also be receiving it in October 2016.

At this point we have no idea what the additional cost will be however. Sony has confirmed this price will not include the PlayStation Camera, which is actually required for PlayStation VR and retails at $89.95 in Australia.

There's also the move controllers to consider. For the best possible experience you'll also need a couple of those as well.

Most likely, all up. You're looking at paying around $650-$700 depending on your situation. I already have the PlayStation Camera and a couple of Move controllers, but I suspect I'm in the minority there.

Regardless, this pricing seems reasonable in the face of VR alternatives like the Oculus Rift or the Vive, both of which will end up costing upwards of $1100 for Australians.

But I have absolutely no idea why Sony would sell a package to consumers that doesn't require all the tech necessary to run it. That seems... strange. Especially considering the cost of other VR tech. A package of say, $629.95 with everything required still seems like a bargain in the face of Oculus and Vive pricing.

Here's a look at everything you'll find in the box:

More info when we get it.

WATCH MORE: Playstation News


Comments

    currently just cant verify the price tag when I don't know what games will use it ...

      http://ps4daily.com/2015/11/confirmed-playstation-vr-games/

        Ok just noticed Dead or Alive Xtreme 3 on VR ... hmmm lol

        Project Cars!!!!! Oh my - The G29 is going to feel so good with a headset strapped on my face!!! Tell the wife i miss her already ;)

      I'd consider it just for Eve Valkyrie and Driveclub.

      Just succumb to the hype and become an early adopter. No justification needed!

      Everyone comes off Battlezone saying it's the real deal. The trailers looked cool.

    october 2015? and it's way too expensive...would rather buy another PS4

    Not too bad. I was actually expecting around $700 or so. May actually consider this...

      If you include the cost of the camera and controller(s) (if you don't have them already) it'll probably come to about $700.

        The fact that the camera and controllers are necessary but not included seems odd to me. I assume this bundle is the entry point for people who already have Move controllers and a camera? Add in those extras and I can see how $550 becomes $700-$750. Still better than Oculus or Vive, though I don't think Sony's VR project has even pretended to compete with those products in terms of pure quality (though I'm sure it's going to be just fine for whatever VR offers the PS4 has).

          Damn I missed that, suddenly it becomes a lot less appealing. Dang. It's still in the maybe category for us but I'm keeping in mind it'd be just another console peripheral that will eventually attract dust lol

            $550 even $600 for the lot and I might get on board (even though my bloody PS4 only cost me $450), but looking at the list of titles there's none I'm particularly interested in. Even if there are future titles or I become hardcore invested in No Man's Sky (as space sims are about the only games I think VR would improve) it's just not a good return of investment for me.

            Edit: scratch that, No Man's Sky isn't on the list of supported titles. I guess the PS4 can handle the game and VR but not both at the same time.

            Last edited 16/03/16 9:38 am

              NMS still has VR support in general as a "maybe", which kinda sucks. Still should be cool enough anyways...

              It's not??? I thought that game was a guarantee for it. That sucks :( I'm of the same mind as you.

          Well, I already have the camera and move controllers, so am very happy they have a headset only price.

            Yeah, it would suck of you were forced to rebuy peripherals. And it makes sense they'd lead with this pricing. I'm sure there'll be a complete bundle announced later, with a less palatable RRP.

              Either that or you'll get retailers doing the bundling. I think Sony's banking on early adopters for the PS Camera also being early adopters for the PSVR. Seems logical to me.

          almost like buying a new 3ds and then not being able to charge it...

        Mov controllers are currently $34 shipped, and you can get the camera from DSE for $50, so even with buying a move and the camera, the total cost is under $650
        (ebay item 301808817999)

        Last edited 16/03/16 9:59 am

          Turns out you can't get the camera from DSE - they're sold out.

            It may be worth calling a DSE store nearby - I literally just grabbed one hours ago doing that

    "We’ll also be receiving it in October 2015. Great news!" - Awesome! I'll go out and get one now ;)

      Goddammit.

        Looks like EB games has pre-ordered out of their first shipment, and are now reserving for the second shipment.

        JB still have some available for their first shipment but there disappearing quickly.

        Quite the response from the market.

          Specially considering this is the whole stock Sony can produce between when they started and October.

          That's a lot of units.

    So the ps4 is nowhere near powerful enough to be running current gen games in VR without a significant drop in quality in other aspects of the game from what I understand. Or is it just going to run at 30-60fps so everyone gets motion sick?

      That's the joy of consoles. It's a fixed target, so they can tailor the game to the capabilities of the hardware. Will it look as good as something running on a several thousand dollars worth of high end PC + Oculus Rift hardware? No. But what's the point of that if nobody can afford to buy it? This will be good enough and at a price that normal human beings might be able to afford.

        I dont think you realise how bad it will have to be, prepare for PS4 VR to look like a ps3 game.

          Who cares? There are a lot of bloody nice looking PS3 games. This isn't trying to outdo the other headsets on tech, it's trying to bring it in at a price point that people might actually be willing to pay.

      It comes with a bridging cpu type box to help with processing

        The box just does 3D audio processing and converts the image for the TV output, that's about it.

        The box helps with some 3D audio processing, and also the box undistorts the video stream for display on a TV. That's it. The PS4 does the grunt work.

        Source : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZVVs5O8NC0

          By helping with the audio processing though, that takes the load off the PS4 in that area and allows more processing power to be dedicated to the video.

            Yep, totally agree. I guess I should have been specific in saying the PS4 does the graphical grunt work.

          Cheers man, was wondering what that did.

          It's interesting that they associate Unity engine with it so much, considering the issues Unity engine games have been having sustaining even 30fps on PS4 (Firewatch, Broforce).

        That's actually a misconception, it's purely for sorting out the video signals. Watch Playstation give their talk at the vision summit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZVVs5O8NC0&index=57&list=PLvWdU6zKkLOTdn9oH56dz2G5Faxh2cnm4

      It's powerful to run games designed for it. You're not going to be plugging it into existing games and running them in VR.

      At least one of the modes it can use has the game running at 60fps and uses reprojection to create the interim frames for a 120Hz refresh rate. According to the other story it also runs at 90Hz, so I guess if a game can run at 90fps it'll do that instead.

        It plays older games in cinema mode and uses the bridge-CPU unit for extra grunt work processing the game.

          Not that much grunt work, as mentioned in DeeK's post above.

          The cinema mode will be interesting. I wonder how much impact the cinema will have on how well the games run, since it'll have to have performance priority over the virtual screen.

            In cinema mode ur running things at the resolution ur looking at them in VR, IE its going to likely be a lot lower than your TV. Cinema mode is dumb unless it was in some kind of future AR tech.

              But doesn't "the resolution you're looking at" depend on how close you get to the screen? It's not going to be dynamically altering the resolution with each frame :P

              I guess the most likely thing would be that the cinema is ultra low-detail with no dynamic lighting or anything like that to keep it ultra-streamlined. Cinema mode totally has its use though, if you can play any of your games without having to turn on the TV. Great for couples who have the TV+console near their bed, and one wants to stay up playing stuff without disturbing the other.

      Don't forget that om games are running on the PS4 now with a shitload of detail and high framerates. When developing on the PS4 platform for VR, it just means you drop the detail levels a bit, and develop from the ground up with VR in mind, so it will mean less extraneous detail in the backgrounds perhaps, or that there won't be a lot of trees with moving leaves in PS4 VR games, but you can still make games that look fantastic and are great fun to play in VR, if you design them that way.

        I think it'll be a year or two before game devs figure out and reorganise which assets should take up the most resources.

      There's a second GPU in the power supply (kind of).

    Presumably there will be a bundle with the camera that will work out a bit cheaper than paying the full $90 for the camera separately?

      Camera currently available at Dicksmiths.com.au for $48.99.

      http://www.dicksmith.com.au/playstation-4/sony-ps4-playstation-eye-dsau-yg10251

    A lot of people here are saying the price isn't too bad - but I just CAN'T fathom paying MORE than what the console needed to use it is worth.
    It just seems like utter insanity to me.
    Also, you have to wonder how much play you will get out of that price. People were nuts for the Wii when it was announced, but we all know how that ended up.
    I don't know if I'll ever stop being pessimistic about VR, despite the awesome possibilities.

    Maybe I'm just angry because the greatest game of all time isn't supported at this point.

      It isn't too bad a price in comparison to the other VR offerings and what with what kind of PC you need to power them.

        But all of the prices are absurd, which is my point.
        Just the prices for the other VR offerings is even crazier.

        But this is just me - i completely understand others will find plenty of value.

        Thing is, though, is I have a wife, a child and a mortgage - So for me this is just way out there.

          I've got a wife, two kids, but not mortgage and I'll just preorder it and pay it off over the year.

      But Battlezone! BATTLEZONE!

        That would be awesome. So awesome.
        But not $650 + game awesome

      An HTC Vive headset costs what... $1200 or so (including shipping), depending on the exchange rate. You can get a PS4 + camera + PSVR headset for about the same price as just the HTC Vive, which doesn't include the PC needed to play the games on.

      If you look at it as the overall cost of getting a working VR setup, as opposed to the cost of a console accessory, it's pretty reasonable.

        That is my problem, I already have a gaming PC so it is going to cost me the same amount the get this + the PS4 to use it then to get the better option.

          Plus I think the PC has a lot more potential for building a worthwhile VR library post launch. I'm willing to put aside Sony's track record for supporting this sort of stuff since they've done a good job embracing indie games, but I think VR will get it's most significant support from a sub-indie tier of developers who just make novelty PC games on a whim.

        Reasonable for you, and others.
        Still far from reasonable for myself and others similar to myself.

      Maybe I'm just angry because the greatest game of all time isn't supported at this point.

      What, Day of the Tentacle? The remaster hasn't been released yet, so it could still have VR support. 8P

      Also, you can play all PS4 games in virtual cinema mode.

      Last edited 16/03/16 9:45 am

      Have you played with the later version of VR though. The hardest thing about VR is getting people to understand how it makes you feel. It truly is a tech you have to experience yourself to understand.

      Regarding price, In Sony's case they're providing a VR headset unit which comes with its own expenses as well as a bridging unit that provides more computing power for the PS4 console so that it can run games at 60 FPS for each eye.

        Heh. I'm going to keep on stomping this misconception that the extra box (or bridging unit as you say) helps in any way with the VR graphical processing. All it does is help to display the VR video stream on a TV, and also does some 3D audio processing.

        Source : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZVVs5O8NC0

        Last edited 16/03/16 10:12 am

          But the VR processing and audio processing does free up quite a bit. It doesn't help crunch polygons, but it does take a load of the GPU and CPU in not having to do the warping and positional audio.

            The warping is done by the PS4. The box just "unwarps" the video signal, for display on a TV.

            Yep, the box does help offload 3D audio processing, so there is that.

          If it truly does nothing graphical then I have no idea how they're achieving 60FPS for each eye(or 120FPS in total) which is minimum need to have a smooth VR experience. I have touched Sony's before but the dev units I played with and tested give a crappy experience if it is less that 45-60FPS.

            Look up the term "reprojection" or "asynchronous time warp". The game is rendered at 60fps, but "reprojected" to 120fps. It's apparently quite effective, though there are limitations to the technique. The significant one being that you can have image judder if you whip your head around fast.

            It's also tough to implement, because you really need to control the GPU and be able to preempt it fast. That's extremely tough to do on the PC, because of so many different drivers and hardware for it. It's very easy to do on the PS4, since, well, there be not so many variations.

            Last edited 16/03/16 12:50 pm

              You brought up a very good point about system latency being fixed. That helps a lot. To add to that it also isn't running Windows, which is multi-faceted OS adapting to different hardware configurations.

              I think asynchronous timewarp is different to regular timewarp, far as I know ATW is exclusive to the Rift SDK at the moment.

              And not sure whether it's different for ATW but regular timewarp I think can only really deal with rotational alterations, you can kind of see weird artefacts at the edges of objects when translating your head's position. Something which kinda bothered me when trying PSVR at PAX.

                Nah mate. They are both the same.

                https://developer.oculus.com/blog/asynchronous-timewarp-examined/

                "Asynchronous timewarp refers to doing this on another thread in parallel (i.e. asynchronously) with rendering. Before every vsync, the ATW thread generates a new timewarped frame from the latest frame completed by the rendering thread."

                PS4 does the same since it has ASYNC from the GCN GPU they use. It runs parallel to rendering and uses spare cycles on the GPU.

                As for the implementation, you will see that it's easier to grasp the predicted head position at the end of a letent frame, if you know the overall latency of the pipeline.

                PS4 hardware latency is fixed for all consumers and the game dev already knows the rendering latency, which is why it works at a higher sampling rate than the Rift.

                No matter what, they both only correct for the rotational head movement.

                Last edited 17/03/16 10:43 am

                  Ah, ok. I thought it was something like regular timewarp was just for updating the previous frame when the current one wasn't ready to be drawn in time, while ATW was for updating the currently calculated frame when it's being drawn to match any change of position since the frame calculation was initiated.

                  @mrtaco Correct. No matter what, VSYNC has to happen at either 90Hz or 120Hz. If all you have at hand is the last frame, you can grab the ATW adjusted one and put that in there.

                  The problem is, if you try to predict too far in advance, you will get those artifacts and judder. If you do too little, you will get nauseated.

                  Last edited 17/03/16 11:02 am

      You pay a *lot* more than the cost of the console for games, when you add them all up, so the console price vs headset price is a bit of misnomer.
      The headset price being about half the cost of PC headsets, even if you factor in the camera and move controls, puts it at a more than reasonable price compared to the market.

        But i'm not comparing it to the market - it's not a question of the market for me. I am well aware of what the other cost, which i find to be abhorrent.
        The comparrison of games, in my opionion, is a mute point. Especially as your comparing many to one. On a one-to-one there is no competition. Plus you can easily get heavily reduced prices for games shortly after release.
        Also, you just can't compare these two things as games are an end - the VR unit is a medium that STILL required more games to be purchased, so I find it really hard to follow your point.

      Did you ever buy the Rock Band or Guitar Hero full band bundle?

        Not at release. Picked up GH bundle for just over $100.

        I don't buy those games for the exact same reason as I won't be getting VR.

      I'm with you on this one loops; I barely have time to enjoy my console and pc these days so paying that much for an add-on. I'm curious enough to want to try it out but no one where near interested at that price point regardless of much it enhances the experience.

        I'm glad you get where i'm coming from.
        *swoon*

      You mean porn? They announced a VR movie player app :-)

        Oh - well now you mention it...

    The move controlers aren't necesary since the ps4 controler already has the same tracking

    It's cheaper than the vive/oculus, sure, buts it not even in the same ballpark in terms of hardware.

    Looking another way, it's almost as expensive as a Samsung S7 with the gear VR.

    I'm not keen on that resolution, and I still doubt the ability for the ps4 to chuck out a decent framerate without shrinking the game experience massively.

    And I doubt the ability of a cheap, external, supplemental apu to make a significant difference to that ability.

    It will be interesting to see how this budget approach goes, but as a still very expensive console peripheral, I wouldn't be expecting "better than move" game support.

      Where can you buy an Samsung S7 for $549 AUD?

      I would also disagree about being in the same ballpark. I would say they are very similar just PSVR is in the lower end which is reflected in the price.

      PSVR benefits from having a true RGB OLED display which means 3 subpixels per pixel (something the VIVE and Oculus don't have). They also use reprojection to boast frame rates. PSVR is also reported to have amazing optics. The single platform means developers can optimise for that system

      They announced over 250 developers working on PSVR games and there will be over 50 games at launch. There is a reddit list of over 100 games confirmed for PSVR. That is more than the life time number of PSMove games.

        Having tried the PSVR and the DK2, the PSVR is better than the DK2.
        The Vive and CV1 still have visible pixels, they aren't a generational leap above the PSVR.

        If you are running a 980Ti, then yeah, the games are going to be way more detailed on the PC, but the PS4 can easily do VR that will be fun and truly immersive, just not as detailed.

          DK2 doesn't lay a finger on the consumer version of the Rift -- or the Vive -- though. Oculus upgraded the technology significantly after the DK2 (which was post the Facebook buyout).

    How can No Man's Sky not be on the list of supported games? Cockpit games are perfect for sit down VR.

      The ps4 isn't nearly powerful enough for that.

      You can't expect the same game experiences in VR with this headset. It's going to have tailor made games which play to the capabilities of the hardware.

      Think Fable: the journey instead of an actual fable game.

        Kinda like how it's getting Until Dawn: Rush of Blood.

        There were plenty of people saying that the PS4 isn't nearly powerful enough for VR. Yet here it is.

        Just saying ... don't be surprised if, in the future, it's announced that No Man's Sky supports PSVR. I'm sure that Sony are working really closely with Hello Games on this. Wouldn't surprise me if they get insider help to optimise the hell out of the game's rendering engine.

          I'm sure they can bring it down to ps3 era graphics and then when you go in everything is just giant blobs using no polygons.

      People ask Sean Murray that a lot, he basically says "No, but that will be cool". My suspicion is that if it's at all possible, they'll be working on some way to make it possible down the track after release.

        Actually, if you listen to what Sean says, he never uses the word "no". He certainly says it would be cool, though.

        I agree that they're working on it. They just can't announce it until they believe it's ready.

          Yeah I agree. So much waiting though! As soon as I have spare cash I'm pre-ordering the PS4 special edition

      Yeah that's a kick.
      Kinda shows the limited potential the hardware has.

      Is this true? .....man, my VR expectations keep getting kicked in the balls.

      It probably needs time to implement. Also we are still a while away from E3, where Sony does the actual announcements to the public. This was just an invite only event.

    How is this convincing me to get one? It's doing the opposite.

    Hey everyone PS4 camera are at Dicksmiths.com.au for $48.99 which is pretty cheap. $10 shipping though which is a bit of a rip off but if you have a store with stock near by you can click and collect I believe. Still quite a bit cheaper than anywhere else is Australia.

    http://www.dicksmith.com.au/playstation-4/sony-ps4-playstation-eye-dsau-yg10251

    I just feel poor now.

    Even though I don't own a current gen console the price of this VR makes it tempting. $750 or so for the VR, controllers and camera plus what $350-400 for the console is still around the same price as the Oculus on its own.

    Throw in that I need to spend $1800ish to build a new computer to run VR and the console version is a hell of a lot cheaper.

    Everyone is saying that they should have included the other extras required to play (Camera, and Move) but I actually think its better this way. I already have the Move controllers which I got back on PS3, so I only have to buy the camera, which is better than ending up with extra peripherals.

    At the moment, I still think its a little expensive, but hopefully the price will come down

    It's up for preorder, time to start paying it off....

    https://www.ebgames.com.au/ps4-212908-PlayStation-VR-PlayStation-4

    So EBGames around 9am had the Move controllers up for sale preowned, 30 minutes later nope gone from the site and only one store has stock apparently.

    Well I already have the PS4 camera and a couple of move controllers so I'm all set.

    Looking forward to the Gran Turismo game, hopefully it's also compatible with my Logitech G29 wheel.

    While it looks like exciting technology, how many pieces of hardware that have actually advanced gaming over the past 35 years that have been that invasive?

    I can think of dozens of “amazing” advancements that have come and gone, but nothings lasted to become a core element of the console/2D tv/controller combo that fits so comfortably with our lifestyles.

    Wii-motes, Kinects, Power Gloves, 3D-televsions..…. if it hasn’t been a minor change (rumble controllers, surround sound) it just hasn’t stuck.

    Basically, I’m too old, wise and financially responsible to buy one of these anytime soon. When I was 21 I would have been all over it!

    This highlights the biggest problem I have with VR at the moment, the headsets cost more than the hardware required to run them. That being said though, I do hope VR can sufficiently replace all of the screens around my place because that would justify it for me.

      One could argue that it shows how low the price of the computing hardware is.

      Last edited 16/03/16 10:18 am

        You'd do well as a salesperson. I'm just finding it hard to mentally rationalise buying a peripheral that costs more than the device required to run it. Even if I could though, I don't have room for VR, unless there is an option to just use a controller instead.

          See thats why PC VR is better, If you had a 2000 dollar PC you would be amazed at how they could do this VR for only a fraction of the cost of the hardware required to run it.

    So $550 for the VR unit which still needs a PS4(?) to use plus PlayStation Camera and Move controllers x 2. All that hefty price for something I can't see stay around for more than a few years. PC will really push the VR generation I sense with games like Elite Dangerous, but I don't see many of those games making the jump to PS VR.

    As much as I'd love to buy a VR unit, I won't. I livedthrough and own the Wii, the Kinect, the Move and Wii U. After all those, I flat out refused to buy an Xbox One until Kinect was an option. Now, with VR, I just can't see it sticking around. It'll be an amazing idea and really will change things but that's only if units sell enough for developers to make more games for them and in turn lower the price of the unit to in turn sell more and make more games. It's something I won't be apart of, at least not at first.

    Cool concept, but far too expensive for what I feel will be mostly tech demos.

      Expensive, but compared to the competition, it's chump change. The Oculus will costs around $1000 here, and most peoples' gaming rigs can't even run it. They recommend a GTX 970, a GPU that retails for roughly $500 alone, an entire new build in 2016 would likely exceed $1.5k; throw in the Oculus and it's $2.5k, not including other peripherals, licenses, etc.

        I get that. I understand it's the cheapest of the bunch, but it still doesn't justify it being more expensive than the console it's need for. By Xmas the PS4 will probably drop another $30-$50 and the VR will be over $200 more expensive.

        It's a shame the Oculus is so expensive, but it seems only the hardest of hardcore PC gamers will buy it. and when a PC can run you anywhere from $800 to $2500 to build, the asking price for the Oculus unit seems like a good fit. But when a PS4 is less than $500 and the VR is more expensive, it makes zero sense.

          I don't think we can really say how much something 'should' cost. If Oculus could sell their unit for less than $USD 600 to maximise market share, they probably would. And from everything Palmer Luckey's talked about (and he's been quite transparent about it), $600's practically their break-even price. The PSVR uses cheaper components, so $USD 400 sounds reasonable.

          Plus it's not like these things are Google Cardboards. They're toting comparable panels to high-end phones, along with CPUs (PC and console don't handle everything), then there's R&D cost. Is it a little odd that PS VR costs more than a PS4? Sure, but smartphones are more expensive than many laptops. Different categories.

    As someone who does not have natural 20/20 vision, I can easily skip this and use the money for something else.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now