We’ve seen many technology trends come and go, VR has never struck me as more than a fad. There’s too many caveats and I don’t believe engineers will solve them fast enough before the public stops caring and the money for development dries up.
Virtual Reality Thread - Goodbye, Real World.
chapel
#162
The enthusiast market would be more than enough to sustain VR and similar tech, just like it has sustained enthusiast computer components.
Obviously content for VR is the harder part, and I feel there are enough developers interested in it that it won’t die.
VR is more than “wow that’s pretty cool”, it is “wow, this is the future”. It will take time, and the Rift and Vive might not succeed long term, but VR isn’t going to go away. It hasn’t gone away since it was imagined, we just didn’t have screen technology to make it feasible.
It is also bigger than games themselves, I feel that the must have thing for VR won’t be specifically a game, but something that makes it entirely unique experience to VR that defines the technology.
MidnightTrain
#163
How many of you guys have tried any of the big 3? I’ve only used the Vive. That’s sweet you guys have one, Chap. You’ve seen the light.
This is an entirely new medium that we’re all learning to use, and it’s going to take time for the language of VR development to be written. Not to mention it has almost no install base presently, so it’s a shit prospect for investment right now. It’s not barely hanging on, it’s barely off the ground.
Give it a shot and then let’s talk about where the tech will go.
DG_Nick
#164
Well, you sure sold me. You say it’s going to take time but like, they don’t have forever.
chapel
#167
You underestimate nerds (at all levels from consumers to devs to CEOs) who want to see VR succeed. Facebook didn’t buy Oculus because they thought they would make a quick buck with it, they bought it because Zuck is a nerd and wants to have VR like sci-fi has predicted, and with that he can make a killing if they carve their selves into the fabric of VR.
Majority of people that have tried VR have loved it, there is no question there.
The only question is how long till we have more consumer friendly/level VR gear. PSVR is close, but it remains to be seen if they will pull it off or treat it as Move v2.
HTC, Valve, Razer, and Oculus (with exclusives) are investing in games for VR, in a way they are artificially stimulating the market to get it started.
Honestly, if a company jumped into VR now only to make a quick buck, they are stupid. Everyone should know it will take time, and it may mean VR isn’t something everyone owns, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t successful. It could mean that VR saturation is around VR cafes or similar. It may very well be the next generation of arcade experiences, which some companies are trying to do.
Some problems of VR now can only be solved when done at scale. That is software problems, UI/UX problems, and cost problems.
DG_Nick
#168
That’s the only place I can really see VR (for games) thriving. The novelty makes it a perfect fit.
I think maybe I wasn’t clear earlier but when I say VR, I’m talking about it specifically in relation to games. I’m sure it’s doing way better in other areas.
Leo
#169
@chapel No, I haven’t tried it yet. I’m not arguing against the quality of the design of the headsets, the specs, or even that there are absolutely no great VR games, because there certainly are, but that I’m highly skeptical that enough enthusiasts are going to buy any of these headsets. I think what needs to happen is the price needs to be more affordable, in order for there to be market penetration. That will help consumers easily digest which headset to look into buying, or trying out somewhere, if they’re fortunate enough.
Another problem is there are too many players involved in the VR space at the moment, and while, yes, competition is healthy, but from the consumer’s point of view, it is overwhelming in deciding which headset to potentially invest a great a deal of money in. I would need to see statistics as to how many enthusiasts have bought the current headsets before I could firmly make a decision of the future prospects of VR. At the very least, it should come down to 2-3 VR headsets: Oculus, PlayStation VR and Vive, but ideally it should be 2 headsets to choose from, one console-oriented headset and one PC-oriented headset.
@DG_Nick made a good point that VR can thrive in the arcade space, but home use is highly uncertain for the average gamer. The technology used for non-gaming applications will absolutely have benefits to humanity, ranging from the medical field, travel agency industry and education in classrooms and in museums/planetarium.
I heard that Best Buy is putting up PlayStation VR kiosks in select stores in the US. The nearest one by me would be in Schaumburg, Illinois. I might have to make a trip there to check it out.
MidnightTrain
#170
Yeah, I’m most excited to try PSVR and see how it compares. The closes place that I’ve found will have it is an hour away, though.
DG_Nick
#172
It doesn’t look like there’s going to be a single good reason to buy VR this year. You’d think there’d be a must-have game by now, or at least a game that was demoed that EVERYONE was talking about. It’s still business as usual and that can’t be good. Worst still, it’s not like everyone has these headsets so the people who’re wasting tons of money making games are going for this extremely unprofitable landgrab, and they’re already talking about new hardware revisions. I have serious doubts this will last. The people who’re making these games will take their lumps and pull out of VR.
chapel
#173
Are you against VR because of how hard it’s being pushed?
It will be at least two years before we can say for sure VR will be on track to succeed or fail. Even then, what is the measure of success/failure? Enthusiast PC gaming is going strong and after Steam came in it became less of the wild west. VR at this point is enthusiast level and at least for PC may be there a few years until the economy of scale for the various pieces come together. It will be further still for mass appeal and pricing for everything.
As long as headset makers aren’t selling at a loss, every sale is a net positive. Game devs are plugging away and good games take years to make, so right now most everything we see are from early adopters, or people rushing things out.
You seem to put the qualifications and risks of consoles on VR when that’s not accurate. We have two large companies, both with money to burn and a love of VR, trying to make it work. For VR to fail, headset makers would have to give up, because there will always be indie devs and a diamond in the rough. Big devs are starting to trickle in, but it’s still a new field and we haven’t see the Mario (for must play) or Halo (for solving a genres control scheme) of VR like you said.
VR isn’t just games and because of that it has extra legs to keep it propped up. I would say it’s an absolutely bad bet to say VR will fail in the long run. It’s still a bad bet to say it will fail in the short term. It could falter in five years if thing just suck, requiring a resurgence, but then it really didn’t fail. I could be wrong but so would tons of companies and millions of people right along with me. It might be too early, or maybe right on time as it can be forced to reality.
DG_Nick
#174
Actually, it’s the exact opposite. I don’t think it’s being pushed enough. And yeah, I think it’s here to stay, they wouldn’t be working on the next headsets if the current iteration was a complete disaster. I just don’t think game makers will continue to throw away money on VR. There’s no profit in it for them.
chapel
#175
The reality is, no big game publishers have gone in on VR, so they aren’t throwing away money on VR. There have been announcements for some things, but mostly experiences and limited scope games. Only indies have been trying for more ambitious game experiences, but even then most are going for activity based games.
A lot of the successful game mechanics that have been discovered over the years won’t work for VR and overall we are still figuring out what works for VR. It is risky for big companies like EA and Activision to jump in on VR not just because of the low amount of potential customers but because of the lack of conventional wisdom for them to borrow from. If there was a large customer base it would make sense to invest in making those conventions, but for now it makes more sense to dip their toes in while watching the less risk averse jump in and solve some of the issues.
I don’t feel a big publisher is going to make the first great VR game that must be played, because in VR graphics and details aren’t as important. In fact less details (not necessarily low resolution or crappy textures mind you) is okay due to built in immersion. That leaves a lot of room for indie or medium size devs to make something people will love.
I don’t think we will see VR in any amount of households like gaming PCs or consoles in the next 5 years. Most likely only a fraction of that. We will see VR “arcades” and places to experience VR show up that I feel will make VR successful by most if not all metrics. That gives more opportunities for people to experience VR and for it to spread to homes.
Maybe game makers need to make licensing agreements for “arcade” versions of their games. Seems like a good idea to me.
DG_Nick
#176
Even if big game publishers had gone in on VR, they at least have the capital to recover from those sunk costs. I feel bad for the indie developers who are probably legitimately excited about VR and making games for it. I just think they’re going to face a hard reality (maybe they already are) when they realize they spent a lot of money on a dev kit and development costs on making a game that’s not going to make a lot of money, or at least it’s unlikely to make enough to justify the time and money spent. I don’t want to say they’ve been exploited, they made the choice to do this and assume the risks, but I can’t help but feel bad for them. Jeff Gerstmann has reasoned that a lot of games priced at $40 or whatever for meager experiences are because “You bought a Vive so you probably have some money” but that’s not the kind of economy you want. That’s obviously the price point of a niche market. It follows then that they don’t expect to sell a lot of copies so they need to sell it at that price point for any hope of making a profit.
I don’t remember if I’ve ever explicitly said it but I don’t want to see VR in the gaming realm fail, but I’m looking at the signs and I’m afraid it will. Maybe they’ll figure something out, anything, but that’s unknowable. Nothing I see today gives me any hope.
chapel
#177
There is no need to manage expectations this time. This isn’t a watered-down, VR-friendly take on the Sole Survivor’s quest. It’s not a side story. Bethesda is bringing the entirety of Fallout 4 into virtual reality, from the smallest bits of junk to the abandoned vaults and dilapidated towns we’ve been exploring since November. And it’s fucking mind blowing.
I’m not terribly proud to say I flat out ignored my chaperone’s initial request to remove the headset. I needed to see more. If the greatest promise of VR is its ability to immerse the player in a new world, I think it’s safe to say that, right now, no one in the industry is closer to realizing that potential than Bethesda. Fallout VR was incredible. It completely redefined my expectations for virtual reality, shifting the goalposts further than they’ve moved in the years since my first EVE: Valkyrie demo. We can only hope the wait for a full release doesn’t last much longer.
Das
#180
That subreddit went batty over that. Couldn’t have happened to a worse bunch of people though.