No they did say recommended, not minimum. You're totally right that it's the minimum to ensure good performance on intensive games and for devs to target but there will be games and experiences that run on less than a 970. They just can't guarantee good enough performance on lesser cards for all games so it isn't recommended.
VR will come in a massive range of experiences that all require different levels of hardware. I imagine anyone making content for Gear VR / Cardboard will have no troubles running it on any other hardware. Obviously a game utilizing every inch of performance out of a 970 won't run on the PS4 or Gear VR, what remains to be seen though, is how many of those we'll see, hopefully plenty.They have Gear VR for video and small, simple gaming.
Any decent interactive demo can elicit the 'holy shit!' reaction in the masses, IMO, so I don't think a single killer app for gaming is possible for VR when there's so much learning still to be done about what the bounds are for comfort levels for players with different intensities of the more fully-fledged gaming experience and the amount of freedom that works well while sitting, standing, and *gasp* walking. Shit's too early for primetime with gaming, but media viewing could be the way.
It really depends on the game. You could get by with a mid range PC for many of the basic looking Unity demos on DK2 but you need something more powerful for games like Elite or Project Cars. As for what's changing with the consumer version, the framerate is going up from 75 to 90 and the resolution is larger too. I'm sure there will still be some basic experiences that will run on more modest PC's but VR games are only going to get more ambitious so its natural that recommended requirements will be higher.
Anecdotally, the experience is strong and impressive enough that it overcomes any goofy feeling of wearing a headset. Everyone I've demoed VR to wants one and that's an incredibly common response from talking to other DK2 owners. But regardless, a bully headset is not an inherent problem. They'll be barely bigger than a pair of glasses within a decade according to Nate Mitchell. People will buy one just so they have a 4K Imax screen for a hundred bucks.
well, no, it was an edit. but I see it now. And I shouldn't have come at you like that, this is my first response to this thread and that's more my sentiment toward the general tone in here and in other VR threads. A lot of people jump in to post their valuable opinions without really seeming like they know shit about VR, really.
I wouldn't consider myself a 'pie in the sky' supporter, I just don't think that VR's viability rests on Rift's day one or year one success, nor do I believe that its day 1 cost will be much of a stopping block, as that cost of entry will drop in reasonably short order, and as viable alternatives to PC-tethered VR are introduced.
