-
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.
Could the Pokemon Go success reduce the already dropping VR interest?
- Thread starter Genio88
- Start date
- Status
It;s embarrassing the lenghts that stupid people will go to try to discredit Pokemon GO because they;re so afraid of how popular IT IS
Opus Angelorum
Member
That's not the case, because you could have Pokemon experiences on both AR and VR.
Embarrassing? The only post I can see with an agenda so blatant so far is yours.
The OP is far from not having an agenda.
I see GO as an isolated success in the AR gaming space. I don't see how its success or even half of its success can be replicated in another game.
I can definitely see how AR can be used as a tool in the future, but we're quite a ways off from that happening. Hololens is cool, but it's not ready. Google Glass is...dead or something?
I can definitely see how AR can be used as a tool in the future, but we're quite a ways off from that happening. Hololens is cool, but it's not ready. Google Glass is...dead or something?
The Elite
BOSS
You could have a Pokemon shooter.
-bakalhau-
Member
I really don't know what to respond to your post OP. Apples and oranges comparison?
Opus Angelorum
Member
Pokemon GO is a free to play game, available to an incredibly large audience (smartphones) and encourages social interaction.
VR could not be any more different by definition.
You're discussing software though. AR and VR are platforms.
But VR isn't popular yet. GO, on the other hand, is already a worldwide obsession. And it's no gimmick — the real-life social dynamic of GO is something you can't achieve in the isolating world of VR.
That being said, I don't think GO/AR will have any effect on VR interest. I think VR interest is low because of VR's requirements — 1) that someone pay the high price of entry, and 2) that someone feels comfortable disconnecting from the world.
Cool. That's not what I said.
Edit: To elaborate, I thought Katamari's post was quite amusing in how it painted the entire world already convinced of VR's imminent takeover, and anyone who disagreed was in denial. Oh, and those people aren't just holding a stupid opinion, they're stupid people. So I considered the colors he wore most vividly showing.
vr is future? vr tech had been here for like what 20 years? And you compare with mobile? somethjng cumbersome as vr cant be future, tho it depends the definition of your future. it will be future when it turns in to a convenient tech to use. so far its luxury and hard to adopt due to demand for other hardware and logistics.
Dreamwriter
Member
Every major VR company has said that it's going to take a long time for VR to go mainstream. I think Facebook said something like they don't expect to make their investment back for around 10 years. And the most mainstream VR device, the PSVR, isn't even out yet. So it's WAY WAY WAY too early to say that interest in VR is dropping. And if anything, Pokemon Go's success will INCREASE interest in VR, as it proves that VR/AR can make a lot of money. A lot of developers who were in the "wait and see" camp are now seeing the potential.
It's funny since the HTC Vive is one of the most social gaming experiences I've ever had. The front camera is pretty useful too. I would love to see a later version integrate AR with VR, but VR is a different technology. It'll get people excited and AR's not comparable.
SomedayTheFire
Member
this is the most wild spin and clutching of straws i've seen today.
DXB-KNIGHT
Member
I don't think the drop of interest of VR is related to Pokemon Go.
I actually don't think GO proves much about AR. The driving force in GO's success is the communal aspect of people finding Pokemon on a shared map in a GPS-driven scavenger hunt, where communicating with others can help you find new creatures.
That being said, I think AR is a lot more approachable than VR. Wearing a VR helmet still strikes many people as dorky and reclusive.
That being said, I think AR is a lot more approachable than VR. Wearing a VR helmet still strikes many people as dorky and reclusive.
AR and VR are pretty much different markets at this point. In terms of gaming, VR is simply not mature enough and it still remains to be seen what killer app will make VR gaming boom in the next gen. So far, I've seen more efforts in the non-gaming applications of VR as of late, with every smartphone manufacturer making VR headsets in conjunction with their phones without focusing on gaming and controls.
AR right now, as demonstrated by Pokemon Go, hits the spot instantly because not only is the technology pretty much mature, but the tech has been accessible to the mass market rather than being an exclusive thing with every phones just needing a camera and no high-spec processor and graphics to work.
AR right now, as demonstrated by Pokemon Go, hits the spot instantly because not only is the technology pretty much mature, but the tech has been accessible to the mass market rather than being an exclusive thing with every phones just needing a camera and no high-spec processor and graphics to work.
In what world the VR is Dropping?
I think he's referring to the real world where very few people are interested in VR outside of small enthusiast communities like GAF
A lot of big companies invested in it, believing it might take off in a decade, but VR won't be taking off anytime soon.
Price is too high, for starters. And wearing goggles and disconnecting from the world still seems dorky and reclusive to onlookers.
(Not that it matters — you should do what you want... Just saying it lacks mainstream appeal at the moment)
I'd say it's very much the opposite. Core gamers and technophiles are the contingent talking up VR right now, the mainstream seems like it couldn't care less.
However the mainstream is completely smitten with AR now. Maybe VR just needs some Pokémon and it can break through too?
This is not a zero sum game, pokemon gos / social gaming success has no direct impact against VR.
Pokemon Go does very basic AR, I don't even use it as it makes the game much harder than it needs to be. AR on mobile is limited. I don't expect it to get much better until there is better hardware and a better interface.
Pokemon Go does very basic AR, I don't even use it as it makes the game much harder than it needs to be. AR on mobile is limited. I don't expect it to get much better until there is better hardware and a better interface.
GoldenCrow
Member
VR may have dropped but it is currently the first gen limited by the requirements of a nice gaming PC and the funds to put into a headset that costs between 600 to 800 if you want one of quality. Also being first gen and being out for less than a year also brings a lack of content, it is also hard to get across to an audience that has no experience of the product made harder by the high barrier to entry. We can't predict how the mass consumer version (PSVR) is going to hit the market and if it will be successful or not but that is the biggest driver for the market as it will get it into peoples hands relatively cheaply.
AR in the form that Pokemon Go is using is old and has been in games for years that haven't done a thing. It has been around on the DS, Vita, PS2, PS3, PS4, Xbox 360, Xbox One and phones and has only really got attention because Nintendo have linked nostalgia to a technology that everyone has in their pocket. It has zero relevance of the VR market, and little relevance to the AR market either as it is an anomaly. The more apt statement could possibly be: should Nintendo become publishers due to the success of the Pokemon Go even if only for spin offs.
AR in the form that Pokemon Go is using is old and has been in games for years that haven't done a thing. It has been around on the DS, Vita, PS2, PS3, PS4, Xbox 360, Xbox One and phones and has only really got attention because Nintendo have linked nostalgia to a technology that everyone has in their pocket. It has zero relevance of the VR market, and little relevance to the AR market either as it is an anomaly. The more apt statement could possibly be: should Nintendo become publishers due to the success of the Pokemon Go even if only for spin offs.
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
Nintendo fans really have it out for VR
In what world are is GO and VR even a tiny bit related
In what world are is GO and VR even a tiny bit related
Opus Angelorum
Member
I mean this is clearly subjective, because I have quite a few friends that are gamers and into tech in general and could not give one shit about VR.
I tried PSVR this past weekend. It isn't going to blow people away any more than the Samsung phone tech. It was really cool and I was surprised by the performance, but it isn't ready for mainstream. But of course leave it to GAF to insist that anything that doesn't change the world overnight is a failure.
Rest assured, however, that the market is there and it is persistent. I've wanted the VR experiences that are available right now from the moment I started gaming on a SNES. Knowing that it's going to get even better is simply exhilarating to me. Two camps can exist just fine with both getting what they want. It's not all or nothing and I'm amazed how people continually refuse to believe or accept that, though that quality is hardly confined to tech and gaming...
Rest assured, however, that the market is there and it is persistent. I've wanted the VR experiences that are available right now from the moment I started gaming on a SNES. Knowing that it's going to get even better is simply exhilarating to me. Two camps can exist just fine with both getting what they want. It's not all or nothing and I'm amazed how people continually refuse to believe or accept that, though that quality is hardly confined to tech and gaming...
AcademicSaucer
Member
Pokemon GO is more about geolocation than AR, but the mainstream press is already talking about the AR revolution .
Well part of the charm is finding a pokemon standing on your couch and catching it like you're Ash.
test_account
XP-39C²
Wait, does the AR aspect of Pokemon Go play a big role in its popularity? I thought that it was the social stuff that really made it what it is.
Wowfunhappy
Member
Why do people keep comparing AR and VR.
Augmented Reality, at least in its current form, is nothing like Virtual Reality. The only relationship is that they post have "Reality" in their name.
Augmented Reality, at least in its current form, is nothing like Virtual Reality. The only relationship is that they post have "Reality" in their name.
we need a user survey to know!
also, i dont think so since it requires a freaking gyro, something that not all phones have
I don't know anyone who cares about it either tbh
KatamariOnTheRocks
Member
Tell me how the short lived experience that GO offers is not a gimmick whose novelty will wear off very soon.
Is it the wide array of gameplay options that aren't there or the mere fact that the game has a social element that is currently pushing it and once that novelty wears off and people realize it's not enough to sustain the game indefinitely you'll see a major drop off in players.
That's what a gimmick is, something that's extremely shallow that tricks people long enough to make their money until "the next big thing" comes out.
Then maybe you should go back and read the OP because it's basically "I've always hated VR and I'm going to try to point to something completely unrelated and claim that it's sucess has anything even remotely to do with an emerging medium that is in fact doing extremely well and becoming more popular everyday."
Of course, but you need to lie and pretend that there is none in order to try to push something that blatantly stupid. >.<
It's a gimmick that has no depth that will wear off soon, VR is far more social if you ask anyone that's actually used it about something like Rec Room, Alt Space or Pool Nation.
Yes, VR is the future and always has been. Everyone with common sense has known this for years and feel free to make a perma-ban bet on it because I know for 100% fact that it will be. Do you realize how stupid your statement is?
"This technology is too cumbersome and can't be the future, but in the future when it's more convenient then it will be the future."
If you've ever used a piece of technology before, you'd understand that they take time to develop and improve and eventually, after time passes, they get better until they reach the point that your average person would consider wearing a VR headset no less comfortable than putting on sunglasses as they will be the same size and form factor.
UncleSporky
Member
Wow, what an annoying blog post.
Video games aren't "about" being alone or being social. They're about whatever the individual work decides it's about, as with all entertainment. Movies don't have to be social, and books don't have to be about being alone. No one gets to state broadly what am entertainment platform is "about" in this respect.
And the Wii isn't the opposite of VR. It laid the groundwork for VR by generating interest in motion control, strengthening the connection between the player and the game, bringing in a better simulation of performing real world activities. I doubt Rift or Vive's motion controls would be anywhere near they are now if it hadn't been for the Wii bringing control like that into the limelight. VR is an extension of ground the Wii started treading.
Obscuritas
Member
No.
It's pretty much the exact opposite of VR in every way so I guess it helps illustrate why VR isn't getting anywhere near the same success.
It's accessible and easy to use (when the servers are working), social and free. After playing around a bit with a Vive I feel like it's at least another five or ten years until VR has any chance at mainstream success. It's still way too clunky, low res, expensive and complicated to be worth it after the initial wow-factor passes. The question is if it can survive as a niche until the tech improves or if will be seen as a failed fad and get stigmatized for another 20 years.
It's accessible and easy to use (when the servers are working), social and free. After playing around a bit with a Vive I feel like it's at least another five or ten years until VR has any chance at mainstream success. It's still way too clunky, low res, expensive and complicated to be worth it after the initial wow-factor passes. The question is if it can survive as a niche until the tech improves or if will be seen as a failed fad and get stigmatized for another 20 years.
test_account
XP-39C²
Its the only way
But i cant really see that AR being a big part of this. Like someone mentioned above, i can see the charm of seeing a Pokemon in the real word, but AR stuff like this has been around for quite some time. I cant really see this pushing for some new wave of games based around AR usage.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
This is like the second bread on the VR-AR comparison.
And yet again, people are bringing Google Glass into the thread as an example on the "side" of AR.
L-O-L
And yet again, people are bringing Google Glass into the thread as an example on the "side" of AR.
L-O-L
Interacting with people in real life is not a gimmick, and will always be more appealing than interacting with creepy virtual avatars in VR.
DeaconKnowledge
Member
AR will take off far before VR does. Less barrier to entry.
What are you talking about? VR is selling a lot desprite the hight price. VR developers are making a good amount of money.
Keep it real please.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked