-
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
RichiRamjag
Member
He isn't lying. He's made some good points.
Several people are making extremely high-end VR arcades:
http://vrcade.com/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cML814JD09g
jellies_two
Member
I think the current VR many are excited for is a situation akin to people getting jazzed for private jets and helicopters at the dawn of the airplane age. That stuff is coming but it will be the pinnacle experience only when there is a good base.
A good base means incremental "boring" entry level VR that isn't such a big commitment. That means cellphone VR, 360 degree drone videos or concert or event media. VR sports and some way - as yet unknown - for the market to sample it and get used to it and push the tech.
Right now there is this gulf to state of the art VR (room scale stuff) that needs filling and the only reason state of the art VR is even being suggested as a commercially possible is because Facebook makes a billion dollars and its a hobby for Zuckerberg, HTC is trying to be relevant and has a willing partner in steam that also has deep pockets, and Sony can also experiment with a peripheral for their huge installed base. Without these companies and their vanity projects (how long will they run with no profits?) there would be no oculus and no Vive, we'd just have google cardboard and gearVR and whatever they mature into.
The only sure bet is VR will creep up in a very boring way with incrementally better mobile-related VR-lite steps. The peak experience stuff will be a luxury that makes nobody any money. Enjoy it while it is subsidised I guess.
A good base means incremental "boring" entry level VR that isn't such a big commitment. That means cellphone VR, 360 degree drone videos or concert or event media. VR sports and some way - as yet unknown - for the market to sample it and get used to it and push the tech.
Right now there is this gulf to state of the art VR (room scale stuff) that needs filling and the only reason state of the art VR is even being suggested as a commercially possible is because Facebook makes a billion dollars and its a hobby for Zuckerberg, HTC is trying to be relevant and has a willing partner in steam that also has deep pockets, and Sony can also experiment with a peripheral for their huge installed base. Without these companies and their vanity projects (how long will they run with no profits?) there would be no oculus and no Vive, we'd just have google cardboard and gearVR and whatever they mature into.
The only sure bet is VR will creep up in a very boring way with incrementally better mobile-related VR-lite steps. The peak experience stuff will be a luxury that makes nobody any money. Enjoy it while it is subsidised I guess.
Imperfected
Member
Drawing in the dirt with sticks, technically.
Zalusithix
Member
Nah, should be table top and other physical games if we totally ignore technological progress. Stay out of that newfangled electronic stuff. Nintendo should have stuck to Hanafuda cards. Hand painted ones. Electronic gaming was a mistake. It's nothing but trash.
You guys are also missing the forest for the trees.
VR/AR is going to be absolutely massive, well beyond just gaming.
If anything, 2nd or 3rd generation VR/AR displays are going to replace all monitors. Once you have the resolution and ease of wearability, there is no reason to ever use a monitor again once you can surround your workspace with a hundred virtual monitors.
MagicLeap is already replacing their workstation monitors this year with their AR HMDs.
I strongly suggest everyone read this article:
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/magic-leap-vr/
VR/AR is going to be absolutely massive, well beyond just gaming.
If anything, 2nd or 3rd generation VR/AR displays are going to replace all monitors. Once you have the resolution and ease of wearability, there is no reason to ever use a monitor again once you can surround your workspace with a hundred virtual monitors.
MagicLeap is already replacing their workstation monitors this year with their AR HMDs.
I strongly suggest everyone read this article:
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/magic-leap-vr/
funkystudent
Member
I have said it before but VR isnt going to be mainstream until its tetherless.
Oculus, Vive, PSVR just seem like stop gaps until they can get that stuff streaming wirelessly good enough or mobile chips get powerful enough to do great 3D in VR.
Everything until them will just be practice and feeling out the kinks in the medium.
Oculus, Vive, PSVR just seem like stop gaps until they can get that stuff streaming wirelessly good enough or mobile chips get powerful enough to do great 3D in VR.
Everything until them will just be practice and feeling out the kinks in the medium.
SneakyStephan
Banned
5-10 years, definitely.
Also, I am talking about workspace environments initially... companies that can afford the tech. Like development houses, VFX houses, banking, etc. Workspaces that today generally use 2-3 monitor setups.
Zalusithix
Member
I wouldn't go that far that fast. Traditional displays have zero comfort issues, extremely high image quality, and ease of viewing by more than one person that's physically present. It's going to take more than the 3rd generation of VR sets to match monitors on their strong points. It's not like tech will stand still for them either.
Compsiox
Banned
-VR is not a gimmick
-It can be used in a small space
-Cable isn't a huge issue after using the headsets for a while
-Resolution isn't a huge issue after using the headsets for a while
-The VR hype is not dying
-There doesn't need to be a "killer app" for VR to takeoff
-To start from scratch it does cost a lot to get into VR
All of this is true.
-It can be used in a small space
-Cable isn't a huge issue after using the headsets for a while
-Resolution isn't a huge issue after using the headsets for a while
-The VR hype is not dying
-There doesn't need to be a "killer app" for VR to takeoff
-To start from scratch it does cost a lot to get into VR
All of this is true.
IbizaPocholo
NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
I think the same.
It's a reasonable position.
VR is an experiment at this point.
Price is a barrier, controls are a barrier and so are limitations in gameplay and health concerns.
Imo it won't be easy for VR to become a mainstream success, but who knows. Companies are betting on it hoping to become pioneers in a new big market.
If it's going to be the next big thing or the next 3D glasses is up in the air.
VR is an experiment at this point.
Price is a barrier, controls are a barrier and so are limitations in gameplay and health concerns.
Imo it won't be easy for VR to become a mainstream success, but who knows. Companies are betting on it hoping to become pioneers in a new big market.
If it's going to be the next big thing or the next 3D glasses is up in the air.
Theognosis
Member
He's right. The home of VR is in the arcades IMHO.
jellies_two
Member
5 years? No way.
10 years? maybe some edge case jobs could use VR for more esoteric applications.
If you need 3 or 9 monitors, you get 3 or 9 monitors. Don't buy a sweaty head mounted display with all the display and comfort compromises it entails. You don't NEED stereoscopic vision for most computer based work anyway. Even in a high end architects office the VR headset would be in the meeting room for when the customer visits.
MikeE21286
Member
I don't think space is a very valid complaint. The bigger constraint is price.
People will make space for something they want to buy.
People will make space for something they want to buy.
krameriffic
Member
The analog to people who buy Ferraris is not VR, it's people who buy quad GTX 1080 Founders editions with waterblocks and $2000 ultra-monitors to play games on.
VR is more like Tesla. Expensive, but not absurd. Unproven, but it doesn't seem likely to go away. Not for the average person just yet.
Kremzeek
Member
I honestly don't see VR truly taking off until:
1. It's cheaper
2. It's wireless- cords are cumbersome
3. It has several "must-have" games or experiences that are truly amazing & unique- not merely current games that have been VR'd
(That said, a new Metroid Prime VR game would make me swoon)
1. It's cheaper
2. It's wireless- cords are cumbersome
3. It has several "must-have" games or experiences that are truly amazing & unique- not merely current games that have been VR'd
(That said, a new Metroid Prime VR game would make me swoon)
We all need to start imagining the trajectory of VR headsets as a niche market rather than "the next big thing". I was guilty of this when I first tried VR because it is such a surreal and unique experience. It was unlike anything I'd seen before; I thought it was going to change everything in entertainment in a matter of years.
Fast forward to a couple months later:
Now that my bias has settled a little, I still see it as an amazing experience. It's a product that will have a very dedicated fanbase, but that community will be much narrower than most expect. The user requirements for VR are so restricting for the general population, and I'm not just talking about price. Complete isolation in the headset, the heavy reliance on demanding hardware, and unrealistic floor space requirements are all reasons that will keep it from true mainstream adoption.
Most people are floored when I demo my headset, but that shouldn't be confused for a future sale. There's a big difference between one-off experiences with VR and using it on a daily/weekly basis. Many people will have trouble justifying the purchase even if they tried it and had an amazing time. If you have young children, it's a tough sell. Roommates or live in a small apartment? Might want to reconsider. If you are someone who is more social, buying a device that blocks off all communication to those around you might sound crazy. The isolation factor is the greatest strength and weakness of VR - it's so immersive and at the same time impractical in the presence of others.
But who cares? I love my Vive and I think it might be better off if it remains a well-supported niche market like console/PC gaming.
Fast forward to a couple months later:
Now that my bias has settled a little, I still see it as an amazing experience. It's a product that will have a very dedicated fanbase, but that community will be much narrower than most expect. The user requirements for VR are so restricting for the general population, and I'm not just talking about price. Complete isolation in the headset, the heavy reliance on demanding hardware, and unrealistic floor space requirements are all reasons that will keep it from true mainstream adoption.
Most people are floored when I demo my headset, but that shouldn't be confused for a future sale. There's a big difference between one-off experiences with VR and using it on a daily/weekly basis. Many people will have trouble justifying the purchase even if they tried it and had an amazing time. If you have young children, it's a tough sell. Roommates or live in a small apartment? Might want to reconsider. If you are someone who is more social, buying a device that blocks off all communication to those around you might sound crazy. The isolation factor is the greatest strength and weakness of VR - it's so immersive and at the same time impractical in the presence of others.
But who cares? I love my Vive and I think it might be better off if it remains a well-supported niche market like console/PC gaming.
By third generation, VR headsets are going to be extremely lightweight... not the sweaty boxes we have now. And if this MagicLeap-type tech replaces sticking a phone screen in front of your eyes, they will most likely be almost identical to normal glasses.
The only concern is how to power them, and keep the battery off your face. Probably a small power lead into a battery somewhere on your person.
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
The price barrier has always been addressed right from the start. Its going to become smaller over the years, thats what people in the VR industry has been saying for quite a long while.
Also, spaces wouldn't be an issue, considering that we'll have seat based vr too
Also, spaces wouldn't be an issue, considering that we'll have seat based vr too
DJSebolski
Member
I was looking forward to VR until I found out Motion controls were required.
I hated motion controls last gen and was hoping VR would be strictly a new "Display" technology.
Hopefully you will be able to sit down and play games in VR, like some youtubers did on Oculus a while ago.
I hated motion controls last gen and was hoping VR would be strictly a new "Display" technology.
Hopefully you will be able to sit down and play games in VR, like some youtubers did on Oculus a while ago.
jellies_two
Member
I demoed it (Vive) today to a non gamer non technophile and he was floored - and he was no way going to spend the necessary coin to get one for his house either. In fact his first reaction was, "can I use this in a spinning chair with less cable hassles? That would be cool"
In other words without knowing it, he asked if the oculus existed, sort of.
So I think a future iteration with a wider field of view and higher density pixels, and a solution for control along with appropriate software, might be a sell. Maybe. But not if it also requires a big expensive PC. To be a huge market like in the stocking at Christmas huge, it should not require buying or building a VR ready PC.
Zalusithix
Member
I hated motion controls last gen too. The experience with VR motion controls is nothing like that. But yes, you can sit down with a controller with VR as well. You'd be missing a whole lot of good stuff by only doing that though.
The only people I've seen compare motion controls ala the Vive to motion controls ala the Wii are people that have never used a Vive.
They arent required.
.....BUT roomscale with motion controls is not the same as motion controls for the wii/ps3. Not even close. I say this as someone who was screaming from before the wii came out that motion controls were a gimmick along with Kinect.
Tumle
Member
Wow didn't know so many people in a video game community would be so down on VR..
And a lot of those that are down on it speaks like they know all about it and what it's like.. But it's clear to see that they have no idea what it's like using one of the prime VR headsets...
OT
yea the time for VR AAA games is not now.. But I have no idea who would have thought that.. There are still a lot of game mechanics that need to be sorted out. So it's like the Wild West right now. Just like when we went from 2D to 3D gaming
And a lot of those that are down on it speaks like they know all about it and what it's like.. But it's clear to see that they have no idea what it's like using one of the prime VR headsets...
OT
yea the time for VR AAA games is not now.. But I have no idea who would have thought that.. There are still a lot of game mechanics that need to be sorted out. So it's like the Wild West right now. Just like when we went from 2D to 3D gaming
Well people aren't wrong, it technically is a peripheral as you still need to plug it into a PC/console to make it work. So in my mind, until they can make it where everything works just from the headset itself, it's still a (very expensive) peripheral.
Motion controls isn't required
And in the case of the HTC Vive in particular:
Room Scale is optional
Standing experience is optional
Seated experience is optional
The amount of misinformation in VR thread is driving me crazy.. Even the CEO isn't able to get it right, it's unbelievable how this FUD is generated.
Motion controls in VR is nothing like motion control in traditional games (which indeed is a gimmick). In traditional gaming motion controls feels like a unneeded extra layer, but motion control in VR on the other hand feels as natural and intuitive as a racing wheel in a racing sim.
GankzyMcfly
Member
I use to think a vr arcade would be a good idea, then i saw how sweaty and gross vr devices can get after only a little while. Hope they dont leave it up to the honor system when it comes to wiping down and disinfecting the device after use...ill be passing either way.
Zepp Twofist
Member
He's not wrong, but most of his arguments are.
Especially the part about nobody having a dedicated VR room, when literally everybody has a dedicated TV room with giant ugly wall covering screens and cable-soup boxes hooked into it that they pay thousands for in annual subscription fees. If the tech is compelling enough, people will redecorate.
King Gilga
Member
He's right.
The technology just isn't there yet.
Maybe in a decade or so.
The technology just isn't there yet.
Maybe in a decade or so.
Ferrarris are definitely not made for mass market.
GTA5 didn't sell as much as it did by targeting an minority subset of gamers.
1. In no way does "literally" everyone have a "tv room," let alone have license to use it however they please.
2. The tech is not nearly compelling enough to make a reasonable mass of people redecorate their homes. Hopefully someday it will be.
A thought I just had: Maybe VR could bring Arcades back? Back in the day video games were not played in your living room, the hardware for that didn't exist, or was to expensive. So with VR, were you ideally need a seperate room (for certain kinds of experiences, anyway), it might be more interesting to consumers to sort of lend a room + VR kit + some installed games, for a certain amount of time (let's say from 20 minutes all the way to an hour or two). Could that be a viable thing, if VR ever gets big?
Screamapillar
Member
He's absolutely spot on. I think Sony and Msoft may be disappointed when VR hits the market on both consoles. The tech still seems very early to me.
Tumle
Member
It is early, this is not a mature technology! But we have to start somewhere things don't just pop into existence..
I'm pretty sure none of the big companies are foreseeing a mass adoption rate, but they want to set them selves in a good position when it does become mass market..
justsomeguy
Member
Valkyr1983
Banned
Moon_frogger
Member
Except the trendy new hot take is that room scale is the 'real' vr experience and any device that doesn't have it has catastrophically fucked up. After having people condescendingly tell me for years that my scepticism was foolish and I simply needed to try vr I finally tried the vive in a large room the other night. While I was impressed with the device, EVERY SINGLE point of scepticism I had regarding it remains. I feel like it could have great applications for a ton of things besides gaming but the idea that it's going to completely alter the gaming landscape is still laughable to me. And it's definitely still just a prohibitively expensive peripheral that will developers will probably flirt with then largely abandon due to lack of market penetration. Of course now the goalposts have moved and people are saying 'oh in another 10 years it will be huge'!!! Which is perhaps true but equally laughable to me considering what people were saying six months ago about the tech. Personally I think the idea of a vr arcade is super appealing and I have a friend who is looking into making a gaming cafe built around the vive. As far as people having this thing on their house and it becoming some sort of paradigm shift or standard, nah. Niche at BEST and even then probably not for years.