kunonabi
Member
Eh, all the stuff played on a controller still falls into that first category with 3d. When full body motion control becomes the standard for vr ill be way more interested.
-
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.
Unity CEO: VR Will Get Huge, But Devs Need to Survive and Avoid Hype Until it Does
- Thread starter vermadas
- Start date
Eh, all the stuff played on a controller still falls into that first category with 3d. When full body motion control becomes the standard for vr ill be way more interested.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
I actually think VR will be at its best when it's doing "NEW" types of games, while also having familiar games like Fallout 4 in VR.
It can't be one or the other. It needs to be both.
GuitarAtomik
Member
It can for sure, and it probably needs to be both for a while until the market matures. But yeah, it will be at it's best and proving it' worth when it's doing new stuff (and it's already doing that).
I would like to know what type of 3D screen you were playing on because the controller based VR games I have played are nothing like the games I played on a 3D screen.
Ruud_Luiten
Member
Nope, otherwise the cheap glasses (max $100) would have sold much more. There is more to it than price alone.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
The $100 versions aren't as good as what the best VR headsets can do. He means once VR headsets can do 4K resolution per eye, wireless, and have foverate rendering for each eye at $100; then it'll have more mass appeal.
hanspampel
Banned
VR right now is the Gaming Industry, Video / Entertainment Industry and to some degree the retail industry (to show off things in VR)
AR right now is already basically every Industry and the Education market
And AR is just one major player on the market in early development stage
This is the reason, why everyone is bullish on AR but not VR
SwiftSweeper
Member
I have had Kinect. I played it for about a month, and that was it. The content and quality of the experience just was not there.
I got my PSVR on the launch day, and I still play it several times per week, so I definitely want it in my home. In fact, I strongly prefer VR gaming to traditional 2D gaming at this point. VR is here now, and it works quite well. Yes, there are things to improve like screen resolution, weight, wires, but I expect things to change quickly. We are still in early days...
There are already full games on the platform like RE 7, Driveclub, and Dirt Rally. There are great multiplayer games like Werewolves Within, Battlezone, and Eve Valkyrie. Rigs proved to me that traditional COD/Halo style multiplayer can work in VR. We also have shorter experiences with AAA productional values like Batman Arkham VR, Until Dawn: Rush of Blood, Psychonauts, and Robinson: the Journey. Finally, there are great and polished indie games like I Expect You to Die, Statik, REZ, Thumper, Wayward Sky, and Tethered. Farpoint and Star Trek are coming this month, and both of them look great.
Still, I would love to have more full AAA games on the platform. For instance, a big open world RPG and a MMORPG would be nice, but we are only 6 months in with PSVR and 1 year in with Vive/Oculus at this point. These games will come. In fact, Fallout 4 VR will be at E3 according to Bethesda.
In short, plenty of us want VR in our homes. There is no need to wait 10-20 years until the next iteration. VR is here and it works already, but there are still things to improve. There are VR games that are worth playing already, and more games are coming. This is not a gimmick like Kinect.
I got my PSVR on the launch day, and I still play it several times per week, so I definitely want it in my home. In fact, I strongly prefer VR gaming to traditional 2D gaming at this point. VR is here now, and it works quite well. Yes, there are things to improve like screen resolution, weight, wires, but I expect things to change quickly. We are still in early days...
There are already full games on the platform like RE 7, Driveclub, and Dirt Rally. There are great multiplayer games like Werewolves Within, Battlezone, and Eve Valkyrie. Rigs proved to me that traditional COD/Halo style multiplayer can work in VR. We also have shorter experiences with AAA productional values like Batman Arkham VR, Until Dawn: Rush of Blood, Psychonauts, and Robinson: the Journey. Finally, there are great and polished indie games like I Expect You to Die, Statik, REZ, Thumper, Wayward Sky, and Tethered. Farpoint and Star Trek are coming this month, and both of them look great.
Still, I would love to have more full AAA games on the platform. For instance, a big open world RPG and a MMORPG would be nice, but we are only 6 months in with PSVR and 1 year in with Vive/Oculus at this point. These games will come. In fact, Fallout 4 VR will be at E3 according to Bethesda.
In short, plenty of us want VR in our homes. There is no need to wait 10-20 years until the next iteration. VR is here and it works already, but there are still things to improve. There are VR games that are worth playing already, and more games are coming. This is not a gimmick like Kinect.
The excitement surrounding VR has just up and died.
I think the tepid response is indicative of a technology that just doesn't resonate that much with people. Better headsets are really not going to solve the problem. If this stuff doesn't absolutely captivate people even in its rudimentary form, then higher resolutions and wireless solutions really aren't going to make a difference. Blaming VR's failure on current hardware limitations is missing the point.
VR evangelists will continue shifting the goalposts towards some nebulous future date upon which everybody wants VR, but commercial interest from investors and developers will probably dry up long before that time arrives.
I think the tepid response is indicative of a technology that just doesn't resonate that much with people. Better headsets are really not going to solve the problem. If this stuff doesn't absolutely captivate people even in its rudimentary form, then higher resolutions and wireless solutions really aren't going to make a difference. Blaming VR's failure on current hardware limitations is missing the point.
VR evangelists will continue shifting the goalposts towards some nebulous future date upon which everybody wants VR, but commercial interest from investors and developers will probably dry up long before that time arrives.
Compared to my iPhone 7 plus.. what you listed has way more tech and the iPhone still comes on top more expensive.
protomouse
Member
I get the impression that immersion isn't a priority for most people. I've had no luck selling the concept to family and friends.
Give it 20 years.
Give it 20 years.
The iPhone 7 Plus is arguably both a more sophisticated and objectively more useful device even if its graphics capabilities aren't as robust.
Or maybe it hasn't taken off because the best version costs like $1000? Cardboard is incredibly inferior to Gear VR which is incredibly inferior to Vive. The technology is fantastic, the barrier to entry however is absolutely massive.
You need the space for the cameras, a powerful computer, a vive itself, all of it can easily cost upwards of $1500-2000 assuming you even have the space. However that barrier is going to become lower over time, eventually you will have self-contained wireless headsets for cheap that do inside-out tracking. However you need to get there in the first place, we're only at the beginning of VR, not the end.
VincentMatts
Member
I understand, but the point i was making is that mobile isn't a good comparison of a "complimentary" device because it is not a device thats primarily used in homes while people have PCs or consoles to use. Its used primarily when they're NOT home. That isnt going to be the case with VR.
People are "used to" the traditional way of gaming just like people are used to the traditional way of watching regular movies as opposed to the 3D ones. Sure, some people went to see a 3D movie every once in a while and some even bought a 3D TV, but most people did not. VR is more akin to 3D than it is mobile.
Im not saying VR will die, but imo it will not ever be a mass market thing, not by a long shot. The simple fact that you cant sit down and use it without having to take it off every so often is already a barrier of entry for most casual. Then add to that the complexity of setting most of them them up (Theyre not pick up and play), the fact that most games arent even games but "experiences", the price etc. For VR to be mass market, the casuals need to jump in and i do not see that happening anytime soon with those problems.
VR is niche and it might be able to survive with just "niche". Hell, Kinect survived long enough without any damn games, so its possible. But in order for VR to be huge or at the same level of a console or mobile, those COD and Madden people need to buy one. And i just dont see that happening. Not anytime soon.
Phones can be priced high, because a lot of people won't pay for them upfront, but rather spread the cost over a year or two. They'll also use their phone every day (probably even once or more every waking hour). Plus, having some form of smartphone is basically a requirement in todays world, and you could go the next three years with that phone not paying a single penny for additional software and still have more to do then you'd ever have time for.
It's really not comparable.
I would just like to add that the cost of the Move controllers is utter bullshit. They're charging the same amount for two outdated wobbly-tech wands that Oculus is currently charging for two ridiculously more advanced and refined Touch controllers with an additional sensor in the package. It's ridiculous.
Clockwork5
Member
It will get huge when phones can provide the experience a Vive running on a 1080Ti can achieve.
Thats not to say there won't be a bunch of awesome content for enthusiasts until then.
Thats not to say there won't be a bunch of awesome content for enthusiasts until then.
VR is expensive, but that's really just an auxiliary issue.
When the iPhone came out it was really expensive, but damned if people didn't want them like crazy. Maybe you couldn't afford it, but it was a product and a technology that you aspired to one day own. Apple Stores were (and still are) packed full of people wanting to get their hands on expensive tech.
I just don't see that kind of desire with VR. Nobody is salivating at the thought of one day being able to have their own VR headset. People are not lining up at Oculus/PSVR demo stations just to get a taste of this incredible thing that hopefully one day will be cheap enough for them to afford. This lack of enthusiasm cannot really be overcome with lower prices.
hamster3 3
Member
We were talking about this at work earlier. VR just isn't practical at the moment unless you are playing a game where you don't move like a driving or flying game. Not many people can set up for room scale without moving furniture every time they want to play.
It's also too expensive. The difference with Iphones is that most people get them on contract and don't think about it when it's only £10 - £15 more than what they are currently paying for their phone.
It's also too expensive. The difference with Iphones is that most people get them on contract and don't think about it when it's only £10 - £15 more than what they are currently paying for their phone.
FIREKNIGHT2029
Member
^ ^ I agree with this.
The iPhone comparison doesn't really work. The iPhone was a significant revision of the cellular phone. Right now, here's where VR is:
VR hasn't had its "iPhone moment" and it'll likely be awhile before we get there.
GuitarAtomik
Member
I'd bet phone and tablet games are played overall just as much at home as consoles. Especially with younger crowds. I get the point you're trying to make, but I don't think it's relevant. It's complimentary because sometimes you're in the mood for something lighter on the phone, or something more involved on the console/PC, and then maybe something more physical like VR. All of that could happen in the home. They're complimentary because they offer different experiences in different ways.
Depends on what you mean by mainstream. Maybe for traditional 2017 gamers it won't ever be, but once you factor in all it's other uses outside games, perhaps it does in a different scale to a different audiences in addition to them. Kind of depends on how it evolves over time (and how long it takes for AR to really get here).
It took like 15 years to go from brick cell phones to the iPhone.
The chart in the OP is predicting a huge upswing sometime in the next five years. Seems way too optimistic.
There were always practical reasons for cell phone development to quietly progress over decades, whereas I am doubtful the VR community can self-sustain once investors realize that profits are possibly a decade away.
That hasn't been my experience. Everyone I've demo'd my Vive for (gamers and non-gamers alike) has left really excited by it, but don't end up buying one. Main reasons:
"My wife wouldn't let me" and
"I need to be able to keep an eye on my kids while I play games".
Zalusithix
Member
Either you're very old, or too young to realize the changes that can happen in a lifetime.
In my lifetime I've seen laptops go from heavy bulky portable slabs with poor battery life to thin and light devices with battery life multiple times longer than those beasts of old. I've seen cell phones evolve from car phone bricks to miniature computers that you can slip in the tightest of pockets. Even in the case of VR, I've seen headsets gone from things that are multiple times larger and heavier to what we have now. In all these cases, the capabilities of the devices improved by orders of magnitude despite the size and weight reduction.
Now consider that I'm not even half way through my expected lifespan.
Yoda
Member
That graph is essentially guessing. There also doesn't seem to be any economics other than hardware costs coming down predicting when VR will "take off". Lets pretend the price point of VR is ridiculously lower than it currently is RIGHT NOW. There's still no good software for the platform, and consumers still view it as a peripheral when buy a console/gaming computer/phone, not the source of entertainment itself.
titiklabingapat
Member
VR will experience the same woes like 3d did and will suffer the same fate.
Yeah but you don't have to wear goofy looking devices for those.
To Far Away Times
Member
VR in 2017 is not worth the asking price.
Zalusithix
Member
You must have missed the phase where everybody was walking around in public with plainly obvious BT earpieces and not giving a care in the world? Even now where they're less conspicuous, they're still walking around looking like they're talking to themselves in stores. Before that you had the time when people were carrying around boomboxes like they were fashion accessories.
And yet somehow people wearing glasses in the privacy of their own home is a deal breaker? Give people enough of a reason, and they won't care.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
The iPhone comparison doesn't really work. The iPhone was a significant revision of the cellular phone. Right now, here's where VR is:
VR hasn't had its "iPhone moment" and it'll likely be awhile before we get there.
It's like people don't understand technology history. Everybody wants or thinks VR is future down the line than it really is. VR is just a 1 year old baby right now. Consoles in comparison are 30 year old parents living in their own homes with a career, and cell phones would be the kid that just graduated from college.
If this was the case of a really highly desirable product that is just too expensive, you'd think there would be more interest in cost-free demos. You'd think there would be VR arcades or something that gives people the equipment and space to have proper experiences.
Best Buy Pulling Oculus Rift Demo Stations From 200 Stores
After speaking to multiple store clerks at Best Buy, Business Insider reported that some of the stores saw very little interest in the device. Even during the busy holiday season, stores would just sell a few Rift headsets per week. One retail worker put in charge of giving demos of the headset told the website that on some days, no demos were given at all due to a lack of interest. Another worker complained about software bugs often rendering the headsets useless.
VincentMatts
Member
True but again, how did these tablets and Mobile get so popular in homes with younger crowds? Every single parent already owned one. Most people in the world already have one for either work or personal reasons. All devs needed to do was release games for it. Any device with that big a user base will undoubtedly succeed. A VR device needs to be bought first. Thats the problem.
For me mainstream is the COD and madden people. The people who dont visit gaming forums and do this from time to time as a hobby. Or the younger crowd that you talked about. Theyre parents buy them these devices. If the parents arent on board, the kids wont be either. The people jumping in right now are the hardest of hardcore gamers.
Yes, it needs to evolve a lot especially in terms of ease of use and price. But how long will that take? Thats the problem i have.
The Greek Freak
Member
Most people still pay for their phone through a carrier subsidy.
People use their phones for a million things throughout the day every day.
Comparing a phone to a VR setup is crazy.
I fully expect resolution improvements and wireless in the near future.
I'm less sure about significant reductions in bulk / weight for large field-of-view headsets. Mainly because lenses tend to be limited by physics and advances in camera lenses have been very slow. Although the headsets currently use Fresnel lenses and don't have to worry about backwards compatibility, so *maybe* they can improve a little faster.
The anecdotes I was relating were not about it being too expensive. Some of those comments were from guys who already spend a lot on gaming. The issue is the isolation / social aspect of VR. They feel that it would not be socially accepted within their household for them to be putting on an isolation helmet for long periods of time where they couldn't talk to their wives or monitor what their kids are doing.
I don't really have any insight on how people are responding to free demos in Best Buy. I will say that when I demo the Vive for people, I put some thought into curating the content in a way that shows off the cool things about the tech. I'm sure it is possible to give a shitty demo experience.
GuitarAtomik
Member
This is looking at it purely from the lens of a gamer and VR has many more uses than games. Who's to say it doesn't make similarly in roads via productivity? The only reason games are the big push right now is because that's the (consumer) crowd most likely to have the hardware to run it.
Majima Everywhere System
Member
It may of been the wrong term for what I wanted to get across, as I don't see the need for shared experiences with VR. I play games alone exclusively. From my time with gear VR, I don't find the headset usable because it's slow to get on and off. It's big and cumbersome. I consider that a greater level of separation from the world around me than a glasses-like solution which in my mind, would be about as much trouble as I would go through for VR.
I consider my closed, over-the-ear headphones to be more isolating than earbuds, even though the only difference is between them is how much crap I have strapped to my head (ambient noise is about the same). I won't wear my over the ear headphones in public, because I find earbuds just keep me more involved in my surroundings.
VincentMatts
Member
I just dont see it in the immediate future. I dont see how a VR device will be more useful or productive than a mobile device or tablet, unless people are all just gonna be walking around with VR headsets everywhere they go lol, that would be hilarious. And even then, how would covering your eyes out in public be more productive than just accessing a tablet or mobile device? Gene Roddenberry was right.
A holodeck though, now were talking! No limitations.
GuitarAtomik
Member
I just dont see it in the immediate future. I dont see how a VR device will be more useful or productive than a mobile device or tablet, unless people are all just gonna be walking around with VR headsets everywhere they go lol, that would be hilarious. And even then, how would covering your eyes out in public be more productive than just accessing a tablet or mobile device? Gene Roddenberry was right.
A holodeck though, now were talking! No limitations.
No lol, that's where AR eventually comes in. VR will always be for stationary (ie room) experiences. Basically for anything you need a 3D representation of. For example, it's easier to model a 3D object in 3D than it is on a 2D screen. It's easier to get a feel for the building or room you're designing in 3D by actually being in it (and why not edit it there as well), rather than imagining it on your 2D screen. Or virtual tourism. Or therapy. Or 360 video. There are plenty applications like that that are useful outside of gaming. Sure, some will eventually be overtaken and be more useful in AR, but AR is even further down the line.
The iPhone comparison doesn't really work. The iPhone was a significant revision of the cellular phone. Right now, here's where VR is:
VR hasn't had its "iPhone moment" and it'll likely be awhile before we get there.
Yea, once AR/VR/MR can be mixed in a pair of fairly normal size wireless glasses for relatively cheap then I think it will take off in the mass market. so maybe in like 5-10 years, probably closer to 5.
Trogdor1123
Member
I'm still on board. I plan on making my computer at this time next year with a focus on vr. I hope there is a vive 2, occulus 2 or a new player with upgrades next year.
VincentMatts
Member
Yeah AR i could see. But thats totally different. Well see i guess. Let me put it to you this way: if i was a billionaire and someone asked me to invest a lot of money in developing VR, i would not. But if it makes it, great.