I don't know what you are arguing. I'm saying companies will not target kids because of potential lawsuits. If pediatricians advise against 3d, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess they will advise against VR.
-
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.
[Rumor] MS to reveal VR headset at E3 2015, Fortaleza still in the development
- Thread starter Kayant
- Start date
- Status
I don't know what you are arguing. I'm saying companies will not target kids because of potential lawsuits. If pediatricians advise against 3d, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess they will advise against VR.
Man I hope you do. I can pull up GAF topics where I was making fun of VR before this past October. There was one time when Evilore came and said even HE was blown away by it - and he's been known to hate gimmicks as well - that made me curious to give it a shot. But most of the time, I've been dissing on it.
I cannot describe enough how the world shifts under your feet the first time you try a demo with presence.
I am afraid of heights, I've been afraid of heights since I was a boy. When my demo started, I was a top of a ridiculously high cliff. I had to leap off it to start flying. I had actual real world physical problems convincing myself to do it, because my body would not fucking agree with me. I was sweating and my heart was beating the same exact way it would the time I was on top of the World Trade Center and Empire State Buildings. I was petrified! It took me some real verbal communication to convince myself leaping was OK.
In that experience alone, it can begin to lead you down the path to understand just how radical this is going to transform things.
It's pretty understandable. If 3rd parties ever get on board with these technologies, they're not going to make their game for VR and AR. They'll choose one or the other, and with Morpheus and Oculus out there the choice would be pretty obvious.
Its not a super simple answer, but biggest factors would be
1) Having to buy a 3D capable TV. They are expensive and if you already have a half decent flat screen TV, its a hard sell to spend another $500-600+ for another one just for 3D capability.
2) The payoff just isn't worth it. I personally like 3D and am not one of the haters who rubbishes the technology, but I still don't own a 3DTV. Its cool stuff, but its not monumentally amazing that I'd go out and spend a crap load of money for it.
3) You need a 3D Bluray player. More $$$.
4) 3D Blurays are expensive.
Number's 1 and 2 are the big ones. All in all, 3D simply requires an investment that isn't proportionate to the benefits. This is where VR is far different. Especially on console. Assuming you've already got the console, you're looking at like $200 for a revelatory experience. I mean, VR blows 3D out of the water and then blows it up with a bazooka for good measure. So even if you had to buy a console plus the headset, or even having to buy a powerful PC plus a headset, the benefit of doing so will be far more justified.
From what I know of VR (I bought a DK2), I really don't think VR is ready for market, the IQ just isn't there yet, and the computing power just isn't good enough yet, especially when consoles are concerned. Not to mention you gotta wear a headset which separates you from the rest of the world. I think one of the big reasons motion gaming and the camera stuff were successful was because you could easily do it with other people, and be social with it. Not to mention how inexpensive it was to get into motion gaming, which I don't believe VR will be able to replicate.
That being said, it'll be interesting to see what MS does since they did have some impressive tech on the Kinect which nobody else has managed to match.
I'll be interesting to see what the future will bring, and I look forward to being proven wrong.
That being said, it'll be interesting to see what MS does since they did have some impressive tech on the Kinect which nobody else has managed to match.
I'll be interesting to see what the future will bring, and I look forward to being proven wrong.
I remember that. He tried Eve Valkyrie with the HD version of DK1 and said he was absolutely sold on VR. And that was with a non low-persistence display and no positional tracking. Even the DK2 is a far better experience than that already.
Yeah.., it's hard to explain simple (to us) things like the impact VR field-of-view and 1:1 scale (just to mention two) has, to people who just doesn't know what it means in this context. People just automatically think "3D", but don't realize that VR can be enjoyed even without stereoscopy.
This reminded me of that supposedly leaked document from Microsoft back in 2012 which makes mention of AR glasses. Some of the presentation was spot on with regards to a "next-gen" machine (Xbone). Managed to find it anyway for what it's worth http://www.gameinformer.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Components-SiteFiles/images-news-xbox720/xbox720doc.pdf
struggler_guts
Member
I'm confused how people complain about having to wear stuff on their head for VR, is there any other way to do it? And being separated from the rest of the world? Isn't that pretty much the definition of VR? A separate, virtual reality?
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
I don't see VR taking off nearly as quickly as GAF would like to hope
My thoughts on the matter are pretty much:
or at all.
My thoughts on the matter are pretty much:
Alx
Member
Of course that's the whole purpose of it. The thing is that not everybody is convinced that it's what the users want. Not all of them and not all the time anyway.
More people need to get their hands on it. Simple as that. Every single thread its quickly apparent that the naysayers are nearly exclusively people who haven't tried it.
There's probably lots of things in life you don't see.
Did people know they wanted 3d gaming back in 1990? Did people know they wanted smartphones back in 2000?
Maybe some, but I'm betting a pretty vast percentage did not 'want' these things before their benefits became apparent.
I don't understand why some people seem to take it personally when others say they don't see VR taking off. I mean, maybe it will and maybe it won't. He just gave his opinion that it won't; you don't have to get mad about it.
MeachTheMonster
Banned
This is factually incorrect[/quote]
http://youtu.be/qrqc8W5VsTY
http://youtu.be/UKsG2Tz3ih4
http://youtu.be/wZfcDOsBs2E
Now a person could have talked about these applications and claimed kinect will change the world, but that wouldn't make it true.
Lots of empty absolute statements based on your opinions, that aren't really supported by facts.
The market demanded a lower entry price for x1. Versions with kinect are still selling.
VR is a videogame periphrial. That's the similar reference point
And sorry this will be my last reply. Your posts are a bit condescending and belittling of my viewpoints and I'd rather not hold a conversation with someone like that.
Who's mad? :/
I mean, you seem kinda mad if you're throwing ad hominems at posters that don't agree with you...
Will I need kinect to use the VR headset fully? My kinect died and I didn't even ship it RMA to get a replacement. Kinect still pisses me off how little software/games utilized it.
EDIT
You know what I and I think most people want with a console? To play games together on a big TV.
If I want to play with gadgets or by myself, I will use PC gaming.
There is a lack of single screen Coop games and it is maddening. I am guessing because developers want to maximize graphics and keep single player or online multiplayer games. Multiple people gaming in a room and having fun is what I see a console for.
Why do we keep trying to get pushed away from this? Halo was popular for having COOP and so was COD, why don't other developers realize this?
EDIT
You know what I and I think most people want with a console? To play games together on a big TV.
If I want to play with gadgets or by myself, I will use PC gaming.
There is a lack of single screen Coop games and it is maddening. I am guessing because developers want to maximize graphics and keep single player or online multiplayer games. Multiple people gaming in a room and having fun is what I see a console for.
Why do we keep trying to get pushed away from this? Halo was popular for having COOP and so was COD, why don't other developers realize this?
MeachTheMonster
Banned
And VR would have to get by all those challenges for consoles BEFORE we even talk about its own challenges.
He provided no explanation or critique other than 'I cant see this happening'.
I think I pointed out a pretty relevant factoid as a counterargument. I'm not mad. But its hard to treat that sort of dismissive attitude with anything other than an equally dismissive response.
Alx
Member
What I meant wasn't about awareness of technology or "they want it but they just don't know it", but about the very need at the base of the tech.
People didn't know about 3D graphics, but they knew about games, expected more complex graphics and richer controls, and 3D answered that.
People may not have foreseen their need for Smartphones, but they did value mobility and connectivity, and Smartphones improved that.
The main reason I'm skeptical about VR mass adoption is that unlike 3D or smartphones, it doesn't follow the current trend. What people have been wanting for the last decade is to take their technology everywhere with them, access all of their media on the go, share whatever they do with other people. Hence why they'd rather do everything on a small smartphone than spend time on their desktop or even in front of their TV.
Stuff like Google glasses is more consistent with that trend, while VR is closer to "hook yourself to a static device at home". So maybe VR will be so great that it will completely revert the tides, but that remains to be seen.
Are you just trying to ignore the harsh realities of the market? They've rejected Kinect. Nobody gives a fuck about it. The numbers show it now.
Like I said before, there's applications and most of them fall comically short of where VR is at. Just look at your second link. That's an application where camera tracking allows people to hold eye contact during conversations. Now, try to imagine how relevant tha'ts going to be when you have a device that not only allows eye contact, but allows you to feel like you're in the same room with the person. Right, Catcheye becomes immediately irrelevant.
The third video is just typical Kinect experience in a toy store setting. It changes nothing, it radicalizes nothing. Now imagine that kid putting on a VR helmet and then actually sitting in a race car going down a track. Right! Who is going to give a fuck about the Kinect experience then? Nobody.
No, they really couldn't have. When you try VR with presence, you'll understand.
Just wait 10-15 years. Kinect will be relegated to the dustbin of history (as it already basically is), and VR will be everywhere. It will be amusing to hear you backtrack then if you're still around, but you'll be so gobsmacked you won't even care. It's just that amazing.
Selling like shit, you mean. Please stop with the revisionist history. Everyone knows where Kinect is at now. Nobody wants it. Microsoft removed it. The Kinect SKU XBO sells like shit compared to the other SKUs. Very few developers INCLUDING Microsoft are even making real Kinect software anymore.
If you want to be intellectually honest about this, you have to accept that whatever you think of VR.
VR is not a videogame peripheral. It can be used IN videogames, but it is not a videogame peripheral. It is a life device that is going to change most any field you can think of. Why do you think Facebook purchased Oculus, so they can break into the "lucrative" market of bleeding edge profit margins and imploding videogame companies? Haha, that's a byproduct of how amazing VR is. It will be used in videogames. But the importance is where it's going to be used EVERYWHERE. Because it will be. It already is starting to be.
please don't prop your insecurities about engaging in intellectual discourse on me.
Well my point was that you can make something sound more limited than it really is. And while I don't deny that VR has limitations, I dont think most of them are any real barrier to popularity that you think they will be. At least not in the long term.
I fully agree that VR faces an uphill battle in the coming 2-3 years. I just happen to think that its a battle that it can fully win if people actually try it so they can appreciate for themselves how 'limiting' it actually is and whether or not the experience is worth dealing with these apparent limitations(I say apparent, because I dont think they are all quite as limiting as you think they are).
People know what VR is. People know what a smart phone is. People know what 3D is. And they knew this before they were available to the masses.
People wanted smart phones.
Name one type of device, that you wear on your head with display content, that is successful?
Unless they have something crazy up their sleave that we don't know, and all will want, and it is not expensive, this is crap. Spend money and resources in other areas.I think like motion controls, someone starts it and everyone else jumps on board "just in case". MS is know for this traditionally. Bah hum bug I don't want E3 to be a VR year, I want another games year.
People wanted smart phones.
Name one type of device, that you wear on your head with display content, that is successful?
Unless they have something crazy up their sleave that we don't know, and all will want, and it is not expensive, this is crap. Spend money and resources in other areas.I think like motion controls, someone starts it and everyone else jumps on board "just in case". MS is know for this traditionally. Bah hum bug I don't want E3 to be a VR year, I want another games year.
Have you not seen all the topics over the past year or so that talked about 'next gen gameplay'? "Yea, the graphics are great, but what are they doing to improve the gameplay?" "Yea, the graphics are great, but its the same gameplay as always." And in general, just complaints that nothing is really being done to further our gameplay experiences beyond general graphics and fidelity improvements.
I think VR is exactly the answer to these wants. Its maybe not the answer they were expecting, but that's often how things work.
MeachTheMonster
Banned
There's absolutely nothing intellectual about your discourse here. Just emotion and opinion you're masquerading as facts
I was expecting internal development from MS on both fronts because of the OS, infrastructure, and services (productivity, learning, communication, search, gaming, etc.) that could be used in those formats.
I think VR and AR are both going to be big. Probably not at the same time (I think AR has more challenges to overcome), but there is a lot of potential for both. I also believe gaming is not going to be primary use case for either one.
hooo boy that is a whip smart response, I now definitely am convinced by your arguments hilariously defending Kinect and ignorantly comparing it to VR.
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
I'm sorry, but did I piss in your cereal?
Get over yourself.
So I can't give my opinion on a matter that has zero relation to you, without being personally insulted by you?
If we went back to the year 2000 and you asked somebody, "Name one device you hold in your pocket that holds a 4" LCD display with internet capability" as an argument against smartphones.........you'd about get what you're asking us now.
Neuromancer
Member
I thought I read somewhere that Kinect had too much latency for VR applications. I guess that was wrong.
You did nothing but present an explanation-less comment that was easily refutable.
I am not the least bit offended, dont worry.
Pointing out that there are things in life you cant see is not 'insulting you'.
But wouldn't you need a 3D vision camera such as Kinect to achieve that?
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
And you did a sterling job at that.... Carry on with your defensive posts.
Alx
Member
Of course I've seen those topics. I also remember reading the same topics in 2006 when the previous generation launched. And I also saw the new consoles break sales record while offering the same kind of games we had 15 years ago. And I also saw many people spending a lot of time on minimalist games on their phone or Facebook page. I've even seen many comments on this very forum stating "just give me the same games with prettier graphics, that's all I want"
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure many gaming enthusiasts craving for next gen gameplay will find what they want in VR. I just don't think that includes a major part of the market.
MeachTheMonster
Banned
History shows us that those limitations are as limiting as I say they are.
Could VR break the cycle and become wildly successful? Yes.
Is it already a forgone conclusion that it will? Absolutely not.
Dee Dah Dave
Member
Meh I just don't see it being worthwhile with poopy hardware. Even PC and Oculus I feel will need to be quickly iterated on.
Call me in 5+ years when a decent baseline has been established.
Call me in 5+ years when a decent baseline has been established.
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
No it's not. It's the means to allow people to exist in a different reality. The power and immediacy of that experience is going to be extremely compelling and addictive and it's going to change our lives.
TharpDaddy
Member
Surface Pro products, later revisions of the Xbox 360, Xbox One/360 controllers, Xbox One, Kinect is pretty good hardware as well, even if the games are not fantastic. Microsoft makes fine hardware.
These VR threads always end up the same way. Mostly a bunch of grampas as usual.
I for one welcome Microsoft to the VR fold. There is nothing more exciting in gaming for me right now than VR. I was losing interest in gaming in general but VR is bringing me back in. Now, we just need to actually have a consumer product out there...
I for one welcome Microsoft to the VR fold. There is nothing more exciting in gaming for me right now than VR. I was losing interest in gaming in general but VR is bringing me back in. Now, we just need to actually have a consumer product out there...
MeachTheMonster
Banned
Kinect is a means for people to interact with a different reality. The power and immediacy of that experience is going to be extremely compelling and addictive and its going to change our lives.
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
Weaksauce response bro. Please try harder.
Feel free to provide even the slightest bit of insight to support your opinion. Hard to treat such a lazy dismissive post with anything but dismissiveness myself, sorry.
No doubt graphics sell and still quench many people's thirst for their next gen fever.
My point is only that there *is* a notable want for something new and fresh, gameplay-wise. I'm not saying that these people alone and their numbers represent the share of people who would ever be interested in buying into VR, just that VR does answer a clear want that at least a fair few people have expressed interest in.
Beyond these people, I think VR is going to be one of those things that gives people something the didn't realize they wanted. I think plenty of those who say all they want is better graphics and they're happy will still get into VR. Not all, but plenty. Enough will. It really is one of those things that is so hard to put into words, until you try it.
Hey man the dude just really loves his Kinect!
Ah, another topic to bookmark for the future. It's going to be so glorious seeing game forums in 10-15 years (low on my list of life desires of course, but hey)
loaf of bread
Member
I'm assuming either they just started working on it recently since i doubt they would make this AND Forteleza before they found out Sony had VR. Or, they bought and took over the rights and development of an already known 3rd party VR maker. Either that or this is wrong and either one of VR or Forteleza isn't happening or they are the same thing.
If its true, I wonder if they'll have trouble getting game support given many VR games will probably be indie which as we know many are exclusive to PS4 due to MS policies, combine the fact that indies seem to prefer the Playstation environment from what we've seen and the difficulties that small studios would face developing for 2 different platforms with 2 different functioning headsets.
If its true, I wonder if they'll have trouble getting game support given many VR games will probably be indie which as we know many are exclusive to PS4 due to MS policies, combine the fact that indies seem to prefer the Playstation environment from what we've seen and the difficulties that small studios would face developing for 2 different platforms with 2 different functioning headsets.
MeachTheMonster
Banned
You must feel that way about your original post then
- Status