-
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
Zalusithix
Member
The goal posts have never been moved. At least by anybody reasonably informed. It was known that the first generation of the tech was for enthusiasts. It was known that it was going to take multiple generations to get to the point where it was ready for the masses. Like every other significant new technology. Real, non-gimmick, paradigm shifts don't take off like the Wii and then burst. They slow burn to mass adoption across a wide range of applications.
Tumle
Member
Ok I have read a lot of the VR threads here on neogaf, and except from a few very ifnfustiastic gaffers, I have not seen anybody saying it would take over gaming and be a paradigm shift from one day to another.. I think people with a levelled head has always said and known that this is the beginning and not something that is perfected already.. So you really need selective reading if you say that the goalposts have been moved..
justsomeguy
Member
I honestly don't believe that any tech which requires you to shut yourself away from the outside world will be a "paradigm shift". It'll remain an awesome technology, but one for enthusiasts.
Tumle
Member
Yes cinema failed so big when it whent mainstream.. But ok you comeback will be.. But you can still see the other people in the cinema... While I'd then retaliate with.. That any media you engross yourself in will close you off from the real world.. Yes I know you can still see your coffee table when playing games or watching movies on your TV.. But are you really aware of them when fully immersed ?
Tumle
Member
He is not wrong when saying that AAA is not going to come to VR for some time or that it's highly expensive right now.. But he is wrong when saying that you need to clear a hole room for it.
Maybe you need to pay attention more to what people are telling you. Because most of the people told you that this is the future of VR, moving around and using your hands in VR. And this didn't change. From the first gen of VR, Vive happens to be the closest to this future. And you have a big issue with that for whatever reason. A issue big enough that you bring this conflictual attitude in every VR thread.
Now, care to point where anybody said that VR will see a mass adoption this year?
Well, he isnt wrong about the prohibitively expensive part, at least for PC VR. Headset, PC and my new GPU will easily push me over $2k but those costs will come down. However, mobile will probably see the most growth first and that will pull console/PC VR with it. I do not agree with him about room scale being necessary but I am a proponent that room scale or having the space to move around really enhances and makes VR better, outside of cockpit type games. Hurdles aside, for me, VR is now and is the only way I want to play. I find even the current crop of VR games far more engaging than anything out now or coming out. While I expect VR to be a slow burn, and can't fault his wait and see stanceI hope Take 2 and other larger pubs come around sooner rather than later even with just experimental projects to test the waters.
Well, i think Riccitello is quite on point here.
Don't know if i'm the only one thinking about this, but i for me VR will sobstitute arcade games and maybe will give birth to a new generation of commercial arcade rooms.
But a proper home VR setup will remain niche, in the way proper 5.1 or 7.1 surround sound setups are.
Don't know if i'm the only one thinking about this, but i for me VR will sobstitute arcade games and maybe will give birth to a new generation of commercial arcade rooms.
But a proper home VR setup will remain niche, in the way proper 5.1 or 7.1 surround sound setups are.
Zalusithix
Member
Many people with VR sets, including myself, have had sessions with other people in the physical area while in VR and all enjoying themselves. You can see what the other person is seeing in VR. With games designed for it, you can even interact with them directly. To say nothing about the capabilities of socializing within VR with people nowhere near you. Sure, you can shut yourself off from the world with VR. You can do the same thing with traditional gaming/TV/reading/whatever.
It's yet another concern I only see brought out by people that haven't used VR, let alone try it in a social situation. Sometimes I feel like a train conductor back in the day assuaging the fears of people afraid that the high speed of the train will adversely affect them. Fears founded on nothing but their imagination.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
It's kind of sad to hear these kind of sentiments when the whole point of oculus was to bring VR to the masses. I was all aboard the hype train and I had a dk2 for a while, but once the price was announced I knew it would be a bumpy road for a while.
I still think it will be successful long term, but not until the prices comedown substantially.
I still think it will be successful long term, but not until the prices comedown substantially.
I can't speak for everyone, but I can't imagine VR being useful for any aspect of VFX work. Even working with a 3d modeling app, artists spend most of their time in the orthographic views. What benefit would VR have over a standard monitor? What do you think multiple monitors are used for?
TBiddy
Member
Also, why would you phase out monitors in favor or VR-glasses? I mean, what are the advantages?
Zepp Twofist
Member
Sculpting a model directly in VR seems like a great way for artists to do direct work instead of having to abstract it in 2d software. Or even replace the process they sometimes use where they make a physical object that they then use as a starting point for their 3d model. Not saying that VR will replace the entire process - and the bulk of the work will probably be done with conventional software for a long time - but I can see some good uses for VR that will probably make the process easier for an artist.
I don't know why this is not well known by now it has been said so many times by this point.
ThatStupidLion
Member
definitely from a AAA perspective Vr isnt impressive. but, it is a great start with a long road ahead
Zalusithix
Member
I'm not a 3D artist, but back in the day, the only way to create something in 3D was to carve, chisel, or mold it with their hands in a perspective view. I think people could adapt (revert?) well enough. Especially with the convenience and accuracy of digital tools brought into that experience.
qa_engineer
Member
Vive. My living room is a multi-purpose entertainment, home computing, and lounge room. Instead of a TV stand I use an ikea kitchen table that doubles as a computer desk. That also means my 50 inch television doubles as a computer monitor. The desk has enough space for me to slide my coffee table under when I want to vive so with some careful planning I got everthing to function and still have room to live in the space.
HUMAN INGENUITY
Here's a picture of my buddy using the Vive in my "living room." This is the absolute minimum space and the Vive simply works as advertised.
qa_engineer
Member
You sir have yet to see Epic's Showdown demo then. Not only does it have triple-a visuals, you're standing in the scene experiencing the visuals first hand. There is a downloadable demo for the Vive and Oculus and I strongly suggest you try i
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Td443iB9slQ
The Elite
BOSS
Vive. My living room is a multi-purpose entertainment, home computing, and lounge room. Instead of a TV stand I use an ikea kitchen table that doubles as a computer desk. That also means my 50 inch television doubles as a computer monitor. The desk has enough space for me to slide my coffee table under when I want to vive so with some careful planning I got everthing to function and still have room to live in the space.
HUMAN INGENUITY
Here's a picture of my buddy using the Vive in my "living room." This is the absolute minimum space and the Vive simply works as advertised.
That's a good amount of space still. I have less than that to work with unfortunately.
qa_engineer
Member
Ha, you do realize its a picture right? You can't show someone walking around in a picture. I have video of the guy walking around picking shit up in the lab, bending over to pet the robot dog, jumping out the way of lasers in Space Pirate Trainer.
Zalusithix
Member
Vive. My living room is a multi-purpose entertainment, home computing, and lounge room. Instead of a TV stand I use an ikea kitchen table that doubles as a computer desk. That also means my 50 inch television doubles as a computer monitor. The desk has enough space for me to slide my coffee table under when I want to vive so with some careful planning I got everthing to function and still have room to live in the space.
HUMAN INGENUITY
Here's a picture of my buddy using the Vive in my "living room." This is the absolute minimum space and the Vive simply works as advertised.
Why is there another person in that picture?! In VR you have to be antisocial and isolated! /s
flyinpiranha
Member
This shit blows my mind every time I watch it.
But, in general he's right. It won't hit mainstream at this price point.
If Oculus and HTC were smart they'd be investing in better demo tools than Best Buy and such. Stuff at fairs over the summer, etc ... hopefully we'll see that.
I don't think it will replace monitors any time soon. But I see it doing it eventually. I work with 3 monitors and even then I find myself lacking and alt-tab between various programs, I would definitely benefit, especially if we were at ridiculous resolutions, pass through cameras, tracked kb, mouse, and little stickers or 'vr wrap' you could put around a coffee cup, etc ..
I see it. It's not soon, but I see it.
Plus, education. Holy shit, the implications here are enormous. The Apollo 11 experience is surreal and that's a fairly low fidelity experience in comparison to most visual tech. I was 'there'. It was amazing. Plus VR experiences for the handicapped, unable to travel, hospital rooms, therapy, etc ...
While it's great for games, and games will push the tech forward (for now). It's not ending there.
I went on a whirlwind tour of emotion with Oculus, I'm over it. I have my Rift, it was a 5 week delay with 0 communication. But I see the future in VR, it's where it will go.
We had a sleepover bday party for my stepson, with 5 kids, 10 year old boys who all had kindles/ipads, and I showed them VR. It was all they kept saying as their parents were picking them up.
"Dad, I touched a dinosaur!" "I was IN Mario Kart!" (Blazerush) and such.
Old bastards that are just now getting smartphones and figuring out the 'internet' has stuff on it aren't pushing this forward. Early adopters and younger generation will.
qa_engineer
Member
Weird right? It's like stereotypes for gamers and nerds in general are just that: stereotypes.
Future iterations of HMDs are going to be pretty much normal glasses that will overlay visuals into the normal world. They will also have the option of blacking out the normal world for full immersion when needed.
You should read this article:
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/magic-leap-vr/
The problem I think, is in the way VR is being described. Look into most discussions and you'll see a combination of "It's the future! I have no desire to touch my other games since getting a Vive!" and "The tech is still advancing, so the SDE, hardware issues and game quality have to be considered a work in progress."
Are both those things valid? Maybe, but you have extreme statements being made that put expectations through the roof. That's before you consider that some people are making that statement about VR for games, and others about VR in general. I guess what I'm saying is the whole conversation has gotten convoluted and most people are arguing apples and oranges without realizing it.
Are both those things valid? Maybe, but you have extreme statements being made that put expectations through the roof. That's before you consider that some people are making that statement about VR for games, and others about VR in general. I guess what I'm saying is the whole conversation has gotten convoluted and most people are arguing apples and oranges without realizing it.
Basically none among the gaf VR enthusiast scene that I'm a part of has ever said that VR will become mass market over night. There's no such consensus. I'm tired of people auto-piloting a false narrative.
There's apparently little care for quality information. It's all about teh controversies. We desperately need bingo cards by now.
Really?
Freeman
Banned
VR is going to be a massive success sooner rather than later. PSVR will likely sell out just as Vive did.
Even the PS4 camera sold out at points, its a guaranteed success if the price is decent.
People here sound like a bunch of bitter old people, "who's going to shut themselves out of reality", "This must do some harm to your eyesight", "people will just look stupid with something like that in their faces", make way for the VR generation.
Even the PS4 camera sold out at points, its a guaranteed success if the price is decent.
People here sound like a bunch of bitter old people, "who's going to shut themselves out of reality", "This must do some harm to your eyesight", "people will just look stupid with something like that in their faces", make way for the VR generation.
qa_engineer
Member
Yep. Go into the Vive OT, Oculus OT, /r/vive, or /r/oculus and you will see that the consensus is that VR is really, really new and won;t hit mainstream... yet. Sony's PSVR is in the best position to make it so.
"We are not looking at a PS Move or a TrackIR here, or even hardware that had corporate backing as substantial as the Kinect. VR is not a gimmick being pushed down consumers' throats by any particular company's intent to capitalize on success they've seen elsewhere."
From Evilore himself and in the sticky thread...Feels like some people should go back and read the VR sticky topic.
Sorcerer
Member
They sort of do when you factor in that you need a kick ass pc to go along with it.
You don't need to dedicate an area for VR, even at roomscale. If you have a 1.5x1.5 meter area around your computer desk, you can do room scale.
The benefit to having a larger area is you can walk around more freely in games that support it, but almost every game can be played in a very small space barring a few. And almost all games are designed around the smallest space possible.
The other piece you hear a lot is about how great it's selling because there is a waiting list.
I mean, I think VR has a future, but it's definitely in the future. I also think PSVR is going to flop. It's too expensive and will basically be Move 2.0.
Wow. I'm on-board the VR train, no need for hostilities. I'm trying to reconcile the vast amount of differing views I'm seeing. I'm sorry if I offended you. The thread on here "VR owners - was it worth it" comes to mind, along with conversations I've had with people in real life.
Is there a consensus? From who? There is no official spokesman, I'm simply going off the various impressions that I've gotten while surfing GAF and talking to people. If I'm looking in the "wrong" places and ignoring a consensus then I apologize. I'm not trying to push the discussion either way, but I'm sorry if I gave off that vibe.
You only need to "transform" it when you are actually using VR. In my 1br apartment I can get a 3m x 2.5m space in about one minute. I have to move the coffee table, slide a chair over a few feet, and move the chaise part of my couch. For seated stuff there's 0 transformation since I can just plop my ass down on the couch.
I think most people could get the minimum roomscale space fairly easily. The bigger problem would be whether their computer is near that space.
Or you could get a PSVR? Or you could get a phone and a Google VR later this year? Or you could buy the new AMD card and have a decent PC way under $1200?
$2000 is close to the most premium experience at this point. It's the extreme example for the whole VR market.
Yes. It takes 2 minutes for me to move a table and a chair to make up for 3.2 x 2.4 meters.
Caayn
Member
I'm not going for that again. I tried with Kinect (2.0) and in the minimum space you very quickly stumble upon th edges of the playing area. Swing your arm or a leg to far and you'll hit something.
Not happening in my house, especially when I can't see anything. (yes I know about the front facing camera of the Vive.
Maybe I should take a picture of my messy as hell room, complete with a bed and drum set to show that you dont need to make a ton of room for roomscale?
I feel that an overwhelming majority of people actually have space for roomscale and dont know it. You dont need to dedicate an entire room for the thing, unless you want to maximize your play space. The minimum space is pretty easy to attain. If you game in a living room, you're pretty much guaranteed to have the space available.
I feel that an overwhelming majority of people actually have space for roomscale and dont know it. You dont need to dedicate an entire room for the thing, unless you want to maximize your play space. The minimum space is pretty easy to attain. If you game in a living room, you're pretty much guaranteed to have the space available.
Thank you for someone who has sensibly answered the question about VR. I applaud the response.
VR is cool and all but do we ask is it practical.
Also folks, please realize if we are gaming we are not alone in the room. I know it is like that in my home. The console is in the living room. They are not just going to avoid you trying to do something.
VR is cool and all but do we ask is it practical.
Also folks, please realize if we are gaming we are not alone in the room. I know it is like that in my home. The console is in the living room. They are not just going to avoid you trying to do something.
Zalusithix
Member
The front facing camera isn't so you don't hit things. It's so you can interact with the real world with the headset still on. The chaperone bounds are there to prevent you from hitting things. Basically virtual walls defining the safe area.
The Elite
BOSS
Judging by this thread I am starting to think the introduction of Room Scale was a little too soon. Or at least Gaffers aren't educated on VR enough to realize that Room Scale isn't the only way to use VR. Hopefully PSVR rectifies this issue once it gets in the hands of consumers.
randomengine
Banned
Most people don't want to. For VR not to die a crib death, it really needs people to want to. It never will.
qa_engineer
Member
Actually it serves several purposes: It can be set to automatically trigger or turn on when you're approaching the bounds of your play space so you don't hit anything, thus complimenting the chaperone system. It can be manually powered on (by double tapping the system button the controller or the system button on the HMD) to allow you to view the room and interact with objects, and now that developers have full access to it, and as Microsoft has demoed, it can be used for a mix of VR, AR, or MR for a Hololens type experience.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcXfdbwjOFs
This is the only example I ever see, and the only one I can think of as well; even at VR's highest aspiration, it doesn't seem to offer too much benefit over a tablet. I guess you could have better control over viewing your model, but we already have accessories that allow for more accurate control like the SpaceController, which require less physical movement.