Spyder_Monkey
Banned
Almost every living room I've been to (including my own) has a coffee table. So it's a safe assumption to say yes.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Take-Two's CEO (2K/Rockstar) weighs in on VR, doesn't sound very impressed
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
Almost every living room I've been to (including my own) has a coffee table. So it's a safe assumption to say yes.
Hockeymac18
Member
This seems to exactly be what hololens is trying to help with. And although I see that use case being more AR than VR, VR could be able to help there, too (especially as the two techs converge).
Where else would you put your feet?
thelatestmodel
Junior, please.
I'll tell you one thing VR is not, and that's a gimmick.
I'd say its something that blurs the line between add on and actual console (at least with what's out so far). Yes, you need a VR device to play VR games just like a regular console where you need the console to play the games. But you also need to connect the VR device to another system. Its not singular like a console is in that it can work alone. Unless of course its something like VR for phones.
Interfectum
Member
VR as it is today will not take off.
Some kind of VR/AR/MR hybrid in the future? Of course it will, but right now there's little reason for companies like T2 to jump on the VR train. They will be there when there's a viable mainstream device for sale.
What does a VR-capable PC cost in addition to the $600-800 HMD? The headsets alone are expensive to many consumers.
The space thing is a huge limiting factor for a lot of people. Saying it's not just because it's not an issue for you is ignorant.
Huge Succeeded
Banned
It's just, I know we're on NeoGAF, a gaming centric forum, but when we have these discussions about VR and they consistently boil down to discussing VR's viability for gaming and comparing VR to gaming peripherals, I feel like we're missing the point entirely. VR's potential and ability to generate excitement is thanks to so much more than just what you can do with video gaming in a virtual reality.
Pretty much. Hard to argue with his points.
Interfectum
Member
I could see AR/VR taking off in the IT world where instead of having 10 monitors at your station you can just put on a helmet and have them all virtually. Same goes for security guards with video feeds and whatnot.
Gen 1 VR? Of course. Pretty much everyone that has bought into VR has said this. To me, it will take at the very least another 2 generations of hardware revisions before it's truly ready for the mass market(That is assuming that by gen 3 the cost has been slashed in half and the headsets are wireless). VR is a new platform and thus it will grow slowly over time, not right away.
Well, you got duped. Those were clear gimmicks. VR isnt.
Uhhh yes.
If there was a country where it would be common to have an entire spare room in your house to dedicate to a hobby, it would probably be the US.
Ferrari are still in business because they are a niche company. Zelnick certainly didn't say that VR can't exist, period - he's just being realistic about how common it will be. He's also not telling "no one to buy it," he's just predicting an outcome and he's most likely going to be pretty accurate.
metareferential
Member
No tech as it is in its first consumer appearence ever took off.
Not even cars.
Disruptive tech takes time. But it eventually changes everything, for better or worse.
And this thread is already entertaining. Let's see what we get. For now we have "gimmick", "VR = Kinect" and other great contributions.
Can't wait for the inevitable "VR = 3D tv". Or something else.
Nice.
I love my Vive, but this should be bloody obvious to everyone.
Still, as someone who was pretty pessimistic on VR when it started out (I'm sure I'm on at least ten crow eating lists that VR minded gaffers have compiled for when it does blow up), I have to say I'm very impressed with the support it already is getting even though there is as of yet no market for it. Very similar to Wii levels, and that was actually good for you.
And that is why I would love to see a renaissance of the arcades. I can't spend so much money on VR or I also lack of the space for the foreseeable future. But I would love to go to a mall and play some VR arcade machines. Or play in a roomspace with VR.
I liked what I have tried it out, but I still think it is not enough to purchase a headset AND upgrade my computer.
I liked what I have tried it out, but I still think it is not enough to purchase a headset AND upgrade my computer.
tearsintherain
Member
As someone who owns an Oculus Rift he is completely right, it made me realize we are still years away from VR being awesome. We need
1. extremely lightweight headset, preferably something along the lines of contacts
2. wireless implementation, this giant cable is awful
3. much better display tech, a jump from 1440p to 16k per eye
All of this is going to require a decade or more worth of advances in GPU, materials, and computing unfortunately.
Its fun at the hobbyist level but its still at that "but... why?" level.
I just hope there aren't a ton of game studios working hard on their VR only games and betting on huge sales.
1. extremely lightweight headset, preferably something along the lines of contacts
2. wireless implementation, this giant cable is awful
3. much better display tech, a jump from 1440p to 16k per eye
All of this is going to require a decade or more worth of advances in GPU, materials, and computing unfortunately.
Its fun at the hobbyist level but its still at that "but... why?" level.
I just hope there aren't a ton of game studios working hard on their VR only games and betting on huge sales.
Why do people keep acting like nobody already owns a gaming PC? It's completely a completely disingenuous argument against VR, nevermind the fact mobile VR exists and PSVR is releasing this year.
He's acting like VR doesn't work seated aswell, Oculus doesn't even have room scale tracking yet...
Dude just sounds overly cynical.
He's acting like VR doesn't work seated aswell, Oculus doesn't even have room scale tracking yet...
Dude just sounds overly cynical.
The Elite
BOSS
I am genuinely curious of where Room Scale ends up in the overall VR picture. It's the experience that most immerses you in the experience yet it's the most difficult to attain for a lot of people due to physical space restrictions. You can't ask people to move furniture every time they want to play a video game. It's just not realistic. You want to jump in and play. The barrier from deciding you want to play a game to actually playing is a huge thing that companies should be looking at. The amount of time it actually takes to getting to gameplay can be an important factor for a lot of people.
The whole "walking around" with a VR headset on doesn't appeal to me (AR seems to be better for that type of thing as you can still see the real world at the same time).
Personally, I'd like the majority of VR games to be vehicle based. It's pretty easy for anyone to find a chair to sit in to simulate a seat in a car, spacecraft, boat or other vehicle.
Personally, I'd like the majority of VR games to be vehicle based. It's pretty easy for anyone to find a chair to sit in to simulate a seat in a car, spacecraft, boat or other vehicle.
the-pi-guy
Member
Interfectum
Member
TBH, I see VR disruption getting disrupted by AR devices like Hololens or what Magic Leap is working on. I honestly think that is where the 'future' is in terms of mainstream devices on people's faces.
I don't think he's being cynical as much as he's saying making games for VR is probably not a good business decision right now. At least not if you're a company like Take Two.
The market is just too small and there are a number of issues (including the ones he pointed out in the interview) that will make it difficult for VR to be truly mainstream. At some point if the number of VR owners doesn't reach a certain threshold it's going to be hard for companies to keep sinking money into this. Even Facebook is going to expect to see some return on investment eventually.
GuitarAtomik
Member
It is. I've said it before, but one day your AR and VR device will be one in the same. That said, AR is still significantly further out there than VR and the two are going to have strengths and weaknesses that the other doesn't until they mature to that point of convergence (which will be a long while out).
"We" aren't all console users and who can't be bothered to invest more than $300 or make the space for a groundbreaking experience.
VR will have to become more affordable to reach market saturation, but that's true for all new technology. That doesn't stop people from crying "not mainstream" though as some kind of valid argument. As for room-scale, it's not part of all VR yet, but it's so incredible of an experience that it probably will be soon enough. People dedicate floor space and specialized setups for speakers, gym equipment, TV, etc. For such a compelling and awing experience, why not do the same for VR? Not to mention the minimum space should be obtainable by most people.
It's one thing to be skeptical as a CEO of a company which largely focuses on mainstream console titles, but these arguments against it are unsubstantial. It's just another voice to the cry of "it's not mainstream-friendly".
Interfectum
Member
I agree completely. Though I do think there will be an AR acceleration in the next 3-4 years that could surpass VR's momentum for mainstream dominance.
But yeah, sometime in the future they'll be one in the same.
It already started.
Also, isn't funny how Microsoft, Google and Facebook are throwing all good money into the technology that will certainly fail? /s
3D, VR, AR and co. mainly sell hardware - there will be 1-2 or software must haves but the market is quite limited for any AAA publisher to go in hard. Not much diffrent than new Nintendo system that rely on Gimmicks to sell hardware, 3rd Partys wont support them either unless the userbase is big enough and willing to spend money on 3rd Party games.
I guess I am with 2K people.
VR still has Sony to try and make it popular, after the first two devices flamed out spectacularly in a short period.
But I predicted a long time ago that this VR fad will die out quickly. It's already with one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel, in 2018 this experiment will already be forgotten.
VR still has Sony to try and make it popular, after the first two devices flamed out spectacularly in a short period.
But I predicted a long time ago that this VR fad will die out quickly. It's already with one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel, in 2018 this experiment will already be forgotten.
If imax played 480p youtube videos
Nothing he says is wrong. People don't generally have rooms with space needed for something like that currently. Might change in the future, but not yet.
And when that time comes, nothing in this says that he would be against it, but he isn't being unrealistic here.
I mean, last gen consoles did what, ~260million. Handhelds? DS did 150million PSP like 82 million and then toss in PC gaming which isn't as easily measured.
Versus 25 million.
It's not inaccurate to say right now in the face of even a large drop from last gen that those 25 million would be considered rather small in the face of traditional gaming. That doesn't mean it can't grow, and that doesn't mean its not "okay" as you described. But its definitely small/niche and unlikely to springboard into massive numbers in the course of this console generation for example. Theres not alot of reason for Rockstar to look at it versus PC/Consoles/Handhelds right now unless they personally wanted to.
And when that time comes, nothing in this says that he would be against it, but he isn't being unrealistic here.
I mean, last gen consoles did what, ~260million. Handhelds? DS did 150million PSP like 82 million and then toss in PC gaming which isn't as easily measured.
Versus 25 million.
It's not inaccurate to say right now in the face of even a large drop from last gen that those 25 million would be considered rather small in the face of traditional gaming. That doesn't mean it can't grow, and that doesn't mean its not "okay" as you described. But its definitely small/niche and unlikely to springboard into massive numbers in the course of this console generation for example. Theres not alot of reason for Rockstar to look at it versus PC/Consoles/Handhelds right now unless they personally wanted to.
Care to provide more details on this? Sales data? Pictures of them sitting on shelves? Big discounts?
I would go with very low expectations in regards to that.
Riccitello didn't express doubts, as was explained to you in the other thread.
BibiMaghoo
Member
I got to have a good spin on a retail OR today, and while the experience is fantastic, and a real improvement on DK2, he is spot on. For this to take off it has to not be expensive, and that means cheaper units coming down the line, which in turn can only happen if enough interest is maintained until then.
There are more roomscale and standing VR games on steam than seated. 194 to 169.
It's hyperbole, I'm just talking about the cinematic mode for use with Netflix and stuff
I'm quite aware it won't compare to IMAX projections, but it'll be better than the gaming TV I use ... and, I think it's a feature a lot of people will appreciate that doesn't require an open room.
I have those things. Also you don't need a dedicated room, I think most people have enough space somewhere in their house or apartment without having to move anything or just slightly rearrange furniture. Furthermore, a lot of avid gamers already have PCs that area capable of VR.
Interesting, thanks for the stats. Do you happen to know about the majority of the ones on the Oculus store and for PSVR? Cause I doubt the majority of them will be room scale; standing experiences, I can totally see though.