So far, how do you feel about VR?

Minato

穏やかじゃない
Joined
Sep 8, 2007
Messages
10,513
Location
Corona, CA
I wanted to make this thread for awhile, and my finals are finally over so I can. There's a lot of stuff happening with VR lately. We've heard about Oculus which is scheduled for this month at quite a hefty price. Then there's the Playstation VR news that's at a slightly cheaper price, but it's still up there. While the price and games will be a huge factor on whether it becomes desirable, how do you feel about VR?

Personally, I'm excited for it. I won't be a day 1 adopter and I don't want it to replace traditional gaming, but I'm interested to see what it offers. There's a lot of ideas that end up not panning out in the gaming world. While I doubt this will get off the ground as fast as touch or motion controls, I'd like to see another avenue for games if that's what a dev team wants.

We'll have our games that have it feel tacked on and pointless, but I'm hoping to see what people can really do with it.



So what are your thoughts? Interested in following it, planning on buying it someday?
 

finalark

SNORLAX
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
7,829
Location
Tucson, Arizona
I tried the Oculous Rift at a Con a few years back. I'm a man who has been playing video games his whole life, but even in it's primitive stage it was the single most immersive thing I had ever experienced in my entire life. I don't plan on buying into it ASAP, but once devs start really wrapping their heads around how to make fantastic games with the technology I will be boarding that hype train.

My biggest fear is that it will be like motion controls - a gimmick that was neat at first, but quickly forgotten once its limitations became apparent.
 
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
4,758
I haven't tried it yet, but I still think VR has a massive amount of potential, and I'd be a day 1 adopter if I had the money to drop. I'm 100 percent down with anything that inches us closer to our dystopian cyberpunk future.

My biggest worry right now, though, is that most developers might not take full advantage of the tech. For VR to be successful, they have to provide brand new experiences, not just "We made the same games we've been making but with VR".
 
Last edited:

DragonBlade64

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
177
Location
Some fantasy world that doesn't make sense
NNID
TwilightDash
3DS FC
3995-7170-7053
I'm gonna be honest here: I think VR is actually pretty cool. However, I don't believe it's going to be "the next big thing." Heck, I actually think it's gonna either be short fad or just flop altogether.

I know some people are going to argue about the whole "immersion" thing, which is fine until you realize the only games that are truly going to pull that off are first-person games, which limits the technology drastically. Sure, they could still try other genres, but it's just not gonna have the same effect and by then, most people would probably just want to play on a normal screen instead having to wear a giant pair of goggles.

Also, there's the issue with the price point. For example, last I checked, the PlayStation VR costs more than a PS4 even. I don't know about you, but I'd much rather use that money to buy a regular console.

Don't get me wrong, there's no doubt that VR has potential. I just don't think it's going to be as big as everyone's been making it out to be.
 

Spak

Hero of Neverwinter
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
4,026
Location
Earth
Also, there's the issue with the price point. For example, last I checked, the PlayStation VR costs more than a PS4 even. I don't know about you, but I'd much rather use that money to buy a regular console.
The price point will change over time. My dad used to work for a company that did fiber optic 15-20 years ago, but few people needed lines faster than dial up and the price was too high to be competitive. The company failed, but now AT&T is using the same technology my dad helped develop 15 years ago and are making huge profits. We are at the top end of of non-immersive graphics right now (because of the diminishing returns of increased polygon counts), so immersive graphics are the next logical step. The technology will get less expensive as more people consider VR gaming as being legit, since more units being sold from mass production results in a lower price needed to make a profit.
 
Last edited:

DragonBlade64

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
177
Location
Some fantasy world that doesn't make sense
NNID
TwilightDash
3DS FC
3995-7170-7053
The price point will change over time. My dad used to work for a company that did fiber optic 15-20 years ago, but few people needed lines faster than dial up and the price was too high to be competitive. The company failed, but now AT&T is using the same technology my dad helped develop 15 years ago and are making huge profits. We are at the top end of of non-immersive graphics right now (because of the diminishing returns of increased polygon counts), so immersive graphics are the next logical step. The technology will get less expensive as more people consider VR gaming as being legit, since more units being sold from mass production results in a lower price needed to make a profit.
Sure, the price point may change, but you have to remember: first impressions are everything in today's world, much more so than it was years ago. Yeah, the tech itself might seem amazing, but if we're just talking about the price alone, then it's going to have to be cheaper right now, otherwise, most consumers are going to notice how expensive it is and then forget about it completely, all because money is hard to come by for most people and more often than not, it's the single factor that matters in most consumer-based situations. After that, it won't matter if they change the price, people will already have a opinion of it, probably more negative than positive.

I don't know it this is a good comparison or not, but I'm gonna say it anyway. A few years ago when 3D started to gain mainstream attention, everybody kept blabbing on about how it was going to be the next big thing. Fast forward to today, 3D is still here, but it's nowhere near the popularity that was predicted back then, and many analysts even consider it to be a flop nowadays. The tech was expensive, it was limited, and people figured out that, while it was a nice option to have, (assuming it was available to you) it was still rather unnecessary. From the looks of it, VR is gonna go through the same thing that 3D went through (more or less), just replace the glasses that nobody wanted to wear with a pair of giant goggles.

Besides, my other point about immersion (which seems to be the main draw of it) still stands. There's only so much you can do with VR to the point where I don't think it's worth it.

This is all just my opinion of course. I understand if you guys are excited for it and if so, more power to you then, but as I've said before, I just don't think it's gonna take off as much as everyone's saying.
 

Spak

Hero of Neverwinter
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
4,026
Location
Earth
Yeah, the tech itself might seem amazing, but if we're just talking about the price alone, then it's going to have to be cheaper right now, otherwise, most consumers are going to notice how expensive it is and then forget about it completely, all because money is hard to come by for most people and more often than not, it's the single factor that matters in most consumer-based situations.
I'm not sure if you remember the release of the PS3, but the price point at release was completely ridiculous ($499 for a 20GB hard drive version, $599 for a 60GB hard drive version). They then removed the cheaper option half a year later, marked down the 60GB version to $499 a little under half a year after release, and then made a 40GB $399 version a full year after initial release. It took another two years after that to make a $299 console, which was the same price as the top-of-the-line 360 of the time. Sony has 83.8 million units sold compared to the 360's 84 million, even though the price point was so much higher.
I don't know it this is a good comparison or not, but I'm gonna say it anyway. A few years ago when 3D started to gain mainstream attention, everybody kept blabbing on about how it was going to be the next big thing. Fast forward to today, 3D is still here, but it's nowhere near the popularity that was predicted back then, and many analysts even consider it to be a flop nowadays. The tech was expensive, it was limited, and people figured out that, while it was a nice option to have, (assuming it was available to you) it was still rather unnecessary. From the looks of it, VR is gonna go through the same thing that 3D went through (more or less), just replace the glasses that nobody wanted to wear with a pair of giant goggles.
Most of the 3D games were either not directly supported by mainstream gaming companies (like glasses-based 3D not taking off in any area of consoles or PC gaming), had large problems (screen angle with stereoscopic 3DS), and you don't feel immersed in the experience because you can see everything else in the room in addition to the "immersive 3D experience" (which distracts the eye from what it should be focused on). VR on the other hand is already supported by Sony and Valve, and are VERY immersive because you can't see your real-life environment and if you have good headphones, they can use surround sound that changes as you turn your head (something 3D could never accomplish). VR has more potential and if the price drops, it could be a viable gaming experience for the general population.
There's only so much you can do with VR to the point where I don't think it's worth it.
Have you tried it? Finalark said it's the most immersive experience he's ever seen. If there's a demo that can make an informed gamer say that, I tend to think the technology running the demo is worth looking into.
This is all just my opinion of course. I understand if you guys are excited for it and if so, more power to you then, but as I've said before, I just don't think it's gonna take off as much as everyone's saying.
I guess all we can do is wait and see where the industry is in 5-10 years.
 

DragonBlade64

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
177
Location
Some fantasy world that doesn't make sense
NNID
TwilightDash
3DS FC
3995-7170-7053
I'm not sure if you remember the release of the PS3, but the price point at release was completely ridiculous ($499 for a 20GB hard drive version, $599 for a 60GB hard drive version). They then removed the cheaper option half a year later, marked down the 60GB version to $499 a little under half a year after release, and then made a 40GB $399 version a full year after initial release. It took another two years after that to make a $299 console, which was the same price as the top-of-the-line 360 of the time. Sony has 83.8 million units sold compared to the 360's 84 million, even though the price point was so much higher.
This comes down to the assumption that developers would need to figure out immediately that it's too expensive and then lower the price enough so that's it's appealing to consumers and still make profits off it, and even then, it's still a long shot. Let's face it: making VR is expensive and if companies want to make their money back, they won't lower the price anytime soon, unless, of course, they're actually okay with losing some cash for awhile.
Also, PS3 was released almost a decade ago. People were much more forgiving back then, so when Sony made changes to the console and lowered it's cost, people gave it a second chance, all because they made it enticing and affordable. Nowadays, people giving extra chances to things rarely ever happens. (instant-gratification)

There's also the high probability that if it's too expensive at launch, it won't sell enough units, and if it doesn't sell enough units, then it won't sell enough software, which means that any developers making games for it won't be able to get all their money back. Most of them WILL jump ship and go back to making games the way they've always been making games because they will do whatever makes the most money. It's happened before and it's still happening today.
For example: Remember the Kinect? That thing was $150 at launch. Microsoft spent $500 million on advertising for it. Look where it's at now. Yeah, they did sell a lot of them, but not enough to convince developers to invest a ton of time and money on it. Then they bundled it with the Xbox One and reversed that decision almost immediately for obvious reasons.

The point is, in order for VR to last, they're going to need support, and that won't exist if they can't sell enough within the first few months at least. The launch price will be one of the biggest factors in that, if not the biggest. As I've said before, as a consumer, I'd much rather spend my money on a console, mostly because it's cheaper and it's not nearly as much of a risk.

It's also worth mentioning that last generation saw a major rise in a ton of new gamers. That 83.8 million isn't that surprising when you consider that gaming REALLY took off last gen, especially compared to previous generations. Also, Sony was really pushing the Blu-ray format. That could've been another factor in their success.

Most of the 3D games were either not directly supported by mainstream gaming companies (like glasses-based 3D not taking off in any area of consoles or PC gaming), had large problems (screen angle with stereoscopic 3DS), and you don't feel immersed in the experience because you can see everything else in the room in addition to the "immersive 3D experience" (which distracts the eye from what it should be focused on). VR on the other hand is already supported by Sony and Valve, and are VERY immersive because you can't see your real-life environment and if you have good headphones, they can use surround sound that changes as you turn your head (something 3D could never accomplish). VR has more potential and if the price drops, it could be a viable gaming experience for the general population.
I was comparing VR to how the mainstream media was acting towards 3D in general, not just games. Also, if "immersive 3D experience" is what your eyes should be focused on, then we already have that. If you're playing a game, your eyes would be focused on the game and not on the room around you. Whether or not you notice the room around you while playing depends on how much immersion you want to feel. As for surround sound that changes when you turn your head, all you have to do in any 3D game is turn the camera around. The sound changes. This isn't anything new. It's been done before.

Speaking of turning your head around, picture this: I'm playing an FPS. There's some guy screaming to my right, so I move my head to the right. In fact, if I want to look around at all, I need start moving my entire head in all directions, which would easily start giving me headaches and make me feel exhausted from carrying this headset on my face after a short amount of time.
In that situation, the thought of using a mouse or a control stick to look around (giving me much quicker movements, BTW) on a regular monitor doesn't sound like a bad idea.

Have you tried it? Finalark said it's the most immersive experience he's ever seen. If there's a demo that can make an informed gamer say that, I tend to think the technology running the demo is worth looking into.
As a matter of fact, I have tried it, and you know what? It was cool. It really was. I'm not kidding. There was a few major problems I had with it though.

One was the fact that I did feel slightly nauseous after I was done with it. I've been playing games literally my whole life (it's my favorite hobby). A lot of times when I get the chance to, I marathon a game for hours on end, including fast-paced, action heavy games. Heck, even when the 3DS came out, I cranked that 3D to the max and never turned it off. All of this is stuff that many people have claimed made them feel ill or given them motion sickness. I've never had anything happen to me that would be considered health related when playing video games until I tried that one bit of VR (this is obviously on a much more personal level and it might not happen to you or anyone else). That being said, I didn't feel too nauseous and I probably would try it again if given the chance.
Then there's also the "immersion" problem. I'm willing to bet that there will be some software that, in order to give you full "immersion," it'll give you the option to actually move around in a real life environment. That will cause a ton of problems that I shouldn't even have to mention, most, if not all them health related. I remember at E3 2014 (I think?), they had a luge demo for Project Morpheus, where they would actually have you lie down and try to dodge cars on a road as if you were on an actual luge. What if someone tries that and starts, say, sweating uncontrollably, hyperventilating, or gets a seizure simply because it feels too real, and as a result, they need to be rushed to a hospital?
Of course, this is highly subjective and most likely won't happen to someone, and granted, they could get it from any bit of media, but it's still worth mentioning.

However, the main problem I have with this is, as I've said before, are the games themselves that will be available to VR. I can't stress this enough. The only games I see that people will want to play in virtual reality are games that are in first-person or something similar to that. That alone severely limits the tech. Assuming VR succeeds, it's library of games would most likely be overrun with more first-person titles than the Xbox. Could you imagine playing a typical platformer or fighting game while using VR? Unless devs somehow figure out some voodoo to make that work in a way that someone would want to play like that, it would be awkward as heck.



Look, I totally understand if all of you hate my guts for speaking so negatively about VR, but I just think that VR has more factors working against it than for it (the world is just too unpredictable, y'know?), but as I've said before, more power to you if you're excited for it. It really is pretty cool, and you know what? I hope I'm completely wrong about all of this. I hope VR succeeds. It most likely has a lot of untapped potential that no one knows about.

Spak Spak None of this is meant to directly "attack" your post or anything, I was just trying to make a debate. Please don't take offense. Speaking of...
I usually try my best to avoid lengthy, complicated debates, so this'll be my last post on this matter. If you guys wanna call me out for being a dork on anything I've said so far, go ahead. I won't judge :)
 
Last edited:

Ocarina Stealer

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
193
Location
Ireland
I have no interest in buying VR equipment and I think it is most likely to fail or just have an underwhelming time trundling along. It's not going to be a record seller.

I think it's kind of pointless and for something that costs more than the actual console that just further fuels the argument to not buy it.

Really this is going to be a short term hypetrain that will crash subsequent to a couple of months after initial release. It's not that the VR will be a bad piece of equipment it is just the price of the thing and the fact that NOT ALL GAMES ARE COMPATIBLE. Also even if all games were going to be compatible there are going to be a lot of games that make the VR redundant and give no sense of immersion.
 
Last edited:

Gallowglass

Smash Lord
Joined
Jan 27, 2010
Messages
1,165
Location
Wanderer
I've been really interested in the Labo VR kit for the Switch. The looks like they have a lot of interesting mechanics I want to try. I've never done VR myself but I think that if this catches on I could see some really cool Nintendo games that would work great in VR.

F-Zero
You're in the cockpit of the machine and you can look around and drive at lighting fast pace along a roller coaster like track. May need add a puke bag in with the cartridge.

StarFox
Similar to F-Zero but now you're flying and gunning. It would be like playing 1st Person on Starfox 64.

Pokemon Snap
I mean the Labo already has a camera option so it wouldn't be too far to have a plastic pokemon snap camera to use. Just like the 64 game where you're on a track using puzzles trying to get the best photographs of pokemon.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
Sadly, people are going to use it for bad things, but I think it’s a great idea.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
VR still needs to improve on some regards, the player's movement being one of them.

I do have interest on Iron Man VR doh, maybe I'll pick a PS VR if the game turns to be a surprise.
 

Lore

Infinite Gravity
GRimer
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
14,136
Location
Formerly 'Werekill' and 'NeoTermina'
Sadly, people are going to use it for bad things, but I think it’s a great idea.
How so? I'm not sure what bad things you're meaning here.

VR still needs to improve on some regards, the player's movement being one of them.

I do have interest on Iron Man VR doh, maybe I'll pick a PS VR if the game turns to be a surprise.
Player movement is mostly solved on most modern systems, but it's really different from game to game.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
How so? I'm not sure what bad things you're meaning here.



Player movement is mostly solved on most modern systems, but it's really different from game to game.
I don’t know. I just have a hunch it’ll happen.
 

Gallowglass

Smash Lord
Joined
Jan 27, 2010
Messages
1,165
Location
Wanderer
How so? I'm not sure what bad things you're meaning here.
Well they already have VR porn games. I personally don't have any issue with that but I could see some people have problems with it.

Another issue I could see is abusing gamer addiction and creating a Ready Player One sort of situation. Imagine if they made a VR MMO that is as addicting as World of Warcraft.

Also they just show Smash VR. I'm like okay?
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom