Support NeoGAF

[Stumpokapow]

I think one of the biggest challenges for VR is the glut of undifferentiated low end software and lack of discoverability options for the good stuff. Like, suppose VR gets cheaper over the next few years and there are thus new owners looking for software -- how does VR get into a virtuous cycle of good software being profitable, leading to more good software, if 99% of what's out there is trash?

(Note that the bizarre Oculus-exclusivity stuff that Oculus is pulling muddies the water further)

 

[ZOONAMI]

Because people have been dreaming about the equivalent of the Matrix ever since it was even remotely a possibility, before that, even, and because that's the ultimate idea of immersion.
And immersion is at the basis of story telling, be for escapism, or even to inhabit someone else's shoes for deeper purposes.

VR, it being a simulation of an alternative reality as close to the source as possible for our senses, is exactly that end point.

It may not be through bulky headsets, it may not even be through more lighter and portable "glasses", it may be some form of holodeck or more direct neuro connections like the Matrix,
but you can't seriously think that a 2d screen is the apex of interaction, when are senses are so much deeper.

I never said a 2D screen is the apex of interaction. But I'm just saying the market may not want anything more than that. Automobiles aren't the apex of transportation but we haven't really moved beyond it on a consumer level because it's far more practical, economical, and easy to use than everyone having their own plane, or jet packs, or helicopters, or hovercraft. So yeah I kind of see VR as like the hovercraft of display technology. Is it cool? Hell yeah! Will it pretty much replace 2D screens even within 50 years? I don't think so. Hovercraft aren't going to surpass wheeled vehicles any time soon even though they pretty much negate the need for roads all together (but that also causes problems).

People are fighting even automated cars just because of norms. Tons of people just don't like the idea of self driving cars because of safety concerns, even though they are stastically safer than humans driving cars. People like to have some control of their physical surroundings. VR, and self driving cars, kind of take that away, so I think there is a natural instinct to not adopt the tech. Automated cars I think will eventually take over though because of industry and government pushing that way regardless of consumer interest. VR relies on consumer interest, and I just don't really see widespread interest.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

Expect a big Fallout 4 VR presentation by Bethesda. I have high hopes for it! There's also Valve's projects, but who knows when we'll hear anything about those.

I'm also hoping they officially announce Doom VR at E3 too. Impressions from the last demo sounded a little too good to just be an experiment.

 

[AmyS]

Honestly, do you guys think there will be a Vive 2, a PSVR2, and (not counting the Oculus standalone VR unit, Santa Cruz) a Rift CV2 ?

 

[Frozone]

If VR fails, AR doesn't stand a chance in the video gaming space. Believe that!

AR doesn't need videogames to survive unlike VR. In fact, I would never invest in AR for videogames. AR is for practical daily things like navigation, surgery, scientific visualization, etc..

 

[mckmas8808]

AR doesn't need videogames to survive unlike VR. In fact, I would never invest in AR for videogames. AR is for practical daily things like navigation, surgery, scientific visualization, etc..

Yeah that was pretty must my point lol.

I think one of the biggest challenges for VR is the glut of undifferentiated low end software and lack of discoverability options for the good stuff. Like, suppose VR gets cheaper over the next few years and there are thus new owners looking for software -- how does VR get into a virtuous cycle of good software being profitable, leading to more good software, if 99% of what's out there is trash?

(Note that the bizarre Oculus-exclusivity stuff that Oculus is pulling muddies the water further)

Great point. And then if there was a way to tell those new consumers a year from now all the great VR games......how could we in good concise know which games will or won't make them motion sick?

 

[ZOONAMI]

Honestly, do you guys think there will be a Vive 2, a PSVR2, and (not counting the Oculus standalone VR unit, Santa Cruz) a Rift CV2 ?

The only one I really see is Sony moving forward. HTC is in shambles and Oculus is a shit show with mgmt scandals.

 

[ChronotriggerJM]

VR is making me consider game development, if only for some rudimentary experiments. I just really need that cost to become practical. I'm really hoping the industry braced for slow adoption.

 

[low-G]

Honestly, do you guys think there will be a Vive 2, a PSVR2, and (not counting the Oculus standalone VR unit, Santa Cruz) a Rift CV2 ?

I think there absolutely will be a Vive 2 and CV2 even if sales only drop from now.

 

[Sleeping Lesson]

I'm also hoping they officially announce Doom VR at E3 too. Impressions from the last demo sounded a little too good to just be an experiment.

Me too! Even as someone who is all-in on VR, the complaints about the lack of high-quality software are valid.

Honestly, do you guys think there will be a Vive 2, a PSVR2, and (not counting the Oculus standalone VR unit, Santa Cruz) a Rift CV2 ?

Absolutely there with by a Vive 2 and Rift 2, but I wouldn't be too surprised if we didn't see another Sony headset any time soon.

The only one I really see is Sony moving forward. HTC is in shambles and Oculus is a shit show with mgmt scandals.

You're off your rocker.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

Honestly, do you guys think there will be a Vive 2, a PSVR2, and (not counting the Oculus standalone VR unit, Santa Cruz) a Rift CV2 ?

I think all of those are assured minus PSVR2.

The only one I really see is Sony moving forward. HTC is in shambles and Oculus is a shit show with mgmt scandals.

Feel totally opposite. HTC spun off their Vive division and seems to be one of the only things going well for them. Facebook has way too much money invested to just give up after one gen. Sony's need to target a more mainstream audience, while having more of a pure game focus in a closed console environment, plus it's history of dropping support for peripherals and hardware puts them the most at risk of not following up.

 

[Prophane33]

I think one of the biggest challenges for VR is the glut of undifferentiated low end software and lack of discoverability options for the good stuff. Like, suppose VR gets cheaper over the next few years and there are thus new owners looking for software -- how does VR get into a virtuous cycle of good software being profitable, leading to more good software, if 99% of what's out there is trash?

(Note that the bizarre Oculus-exclusivity stuff that Oculus is pulling muddies the water further)

Bingo! As I mentioned in a previous comment, it seems like most developers are waiting for another developer to jump in fully before committing, but nobody (other than maybe Capcom with RE7) seems willing to invest in a fully playable deep experience at this point in time. Either there are (relatively) overpriced "experiences" or "modes" of other games, but there has so far been no absolute must play VR exclusive game (something that takes full advantage of the medium to deliver a multiple hour gameplay experience equivalent to a full priced console or PC game) Granted, this is still a nascent stage in the history of the consumer VR medium, so I won't discount the fact that it may exist one day, but it seems like something on the far off horizon at this point.

I (like many people) were hoping VR would hit the ground running, but it's more like a slow crawl. Like any peripheral or game console the bottom line is games, and while some stuff looks neat, there isn't anything most people are willing to pay 50 or 60 dollars for yet.

As the hardware gets cheaper devs may be more willing to take the risk. I hope so anyway.

 

[Tain]

I think one of the biggest challenges for VR is the glut of undifferentiated low end software and lack of discoverability options for the good stuff. Like, suppose VR gets cheaper over the next few years and there are thus new owners looking for software -- how does VR get into a virtuous cycle of good software being profitable, leading to more good software, if 99% of what's out there is trash?

(Note that the bizarre Oculus-exclusivity stuff that Oculus is pulling muddies the water further)

This is a real issue. It's not as big of one yet because the crowd is so enthusiast and used to digging for software, but yeah, how do you step beyond that?

PSVR and Oculus are actually pretty okay with this, but that's mostly because they're smaller ecosystems with higher-budget software when compared to Steam.

 

[vermadas]

Honestly, do you guys think there will be a Vive 2, a PSVR2, and (not counting the Oculus standalone VR unit, Santa Cruz) a Rift CV2 ?

Vive 2: Yes
PSVR2: Probably
Rift CV2: Yes

There's also Lenovo's Windows Holographic HMD rumored to come out in August, and LG's SteamVR headset.

Re: Oculus, I see Santa Cruz / Monteray to be more of an evolution from Gear VR, and we'll get an updated PC connected headset eventually. After that though, who knows.

 

[Tain]

Honestly, do you guys think there will be a Vive 2, a PSVR2, and (not counting the Oculus standalone VR unit, Santa Cruz) a Rift CV2 ?

Do you think there's a chance that these won't happen? I think a new Vive and Rift are 100% happening.

 

[AllIsOneIsNone]

The only one I really see is Sony moving forward. HTC is in shambles and Oculus is a shit show with mgmt scandals.

I would sort of say the exact opposite, honestly. If anyone drops out I think it will be Sony. HTC has straight up said they're putting all their chips in VR, plus they've done okay with it thus far. Oculus has tons of funding and Zuckerberg truly believes it's the next big thing and has also stated that he thinks it will take quite a few years to catch on. Sony is known to dump peripherals like a bad habit, and the problem with console VR is there are fewer developers for it, even if most PC VR developers have low budgets. Right now low budget stuff is where it makes more financial sense and it's also where experimentation is happening. That also gives more variety for consumers, even if there is a lot more crap out there.

I still think it's likely that all 3 companies have a round 2, though.

 

[jonscrambler]

Honestly, do you guys think there will be a Vive 2, a PSVR2, and (not counting the Oculus standalone VR unit, Santa Cruz) a Rift CV2 ?

Vive 2 and Rift 2 definitely are happening

 

[ZOONAMI]

Ok I'm wrong. Didn't realize vive was spun off. Was basing on sales numbers where Sony has done well enough to keep going but such low volume on vive and oculus made me think they might just get dropped.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

Ok I'm wrong. Didn't realize vive was spun off. Was basing on sales numbers where Sony has done well enough to keep going but such low volume on vive and oculus made me think they might just get dropped.

The volume sold is totally in line with their expectations. Both HTC and Oculus knew they weren't going to be selling millions any time soon and are playing the long game. It was 3rd party companies like SuperData that was inflating expectations with guesstimates.

 

[MTC100]

I expect VR to take another 10 years to reach the mass market. I hope that there will be games worth playing until then, there won't be enough people willing to buy such a headset for space sims(niche genre) and mini games alone.

 

[Karak]

I think all of those are assured minus PSVR2.


Feel totally opposite. HTC spun off their Vive division and seems to be one of the only things going well for them.

Ya even the devs I talk to for the show completely think HTC is the current bright spot by a long shot.

 

[Symbiotx]

Oh of course some of you saw this as an opportunity to try to say "I WAS RIGHT, VR IS A FAILING FAD"

I don't understand why people are so negative about VR. The more negative you are about it and how it won't be worth it for 10 years is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If everyone doesn't buy it until it's better, it won't get better.

People still underestimate VR thinking it's the new wii or something. All of this is really not complicated. It's cool technology that needs more quality games. That's it.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Oh of course some of you saw this as an opportunity to try to say "I WAS RIGHT, VR IS A FAILING FAD"

I don't understand why people are so negative about VR. The more negative you are about it and how it won't be worth it for 10 years is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If everyone doesn't buy it until it's better, it won't get better.

People still underestimate VR thinking it's the new wii or something. All of this is really not complicated. It's cool technology that needs more quality games. That's it.

People are so negative on it because there are so many people trying to push it down people's throats about how it's the future. It's just the natural reaction when there are people who come off strong about pushing VR.

 

[ZOONAMI]

Oh of course some of you saw this as an opportunity to try to say "I WAS RIGHT, VR IS A FAILING FAD"

I don't understand why people are so negative about VR. The more negative you are about it and how it won't be worth it for 10 years is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If everyone doesn't buy it until it's better, it won't get better.

People still underestimate VR thinking it's the new wii or something. All of this is really not complicated. It's cool technology that needs more quality games. That's it.

In the flip side there seems to be quite the devoted VR defense force on GAF that has zero parallel in the mainstream. Most people don't have any real interest, and if they even have tried it are generally disappointed in the long term. People have an initial reaction to Gear VR for example of ah yeah that's pretty cool and then don't touch their headset again. There's a reason a lot of people think it's a gimmick and not the future. It seems like it is a gimmick right now to the vast majority of the public. There isn't anything wrong with pointing that out. It's not guaranteed to be the future of display tech no matter how much I hear it on GAF. People like their tvs, doing other stuff at the same time, hanging out with other people in the room, eating, etc. They don't want to strap into a headset for hours in a month, much less in a day. Even if there is content you have to break the barrier of having time to consume it. You can make the argument that video games in general suffer from the same problem, but it isn't quite the same, as you can still do it and multitask. With VR you really can't.

Even the high end VR iq is shit compared to my tv, and even if we got to a point where we had 8k VR for affordable prices I don't see myself wanting to use it over a TV outside of something I might do... in a ... private setting.

Edit: yep see post above ^

 

[Pokemaniac]

AR can replace your screen, make computing available everywhere, that's all there's to it. People don't buy a tablet because they want to play games, they buy a tablet because it untethers their computer from the desk or even their personal sphere and make it so they can bring it to meetings and huddle around it. The games just follow where the computing is. (Console gaming comes from a time where it was cheaper to hook up a pc to a tv than get a pc and a screen). AR has a productivity benefit, VR so far doesn't really. Mainstream gets computing for productivity first and foremost.

Well of course AR has a lot of potential applications for general purpose computing (having a HUD in real life would be awesome), but talking specifically about gaming, I just don't see any real benefits AR brings to the table.

 

[VindicatorZ]

In the flip side there seems to be quite the devoted VR defense force on GAF that has zero parallel in the mainstream. Most people don't have any real interest, and if they even have tried it are generally disappointed in the long term. People have an initial reaction to Gear VR for example of ah yeah that's pretty cool and then don't touch their headset again. There's a reason a lot of people think it's a gimmick and not the future. It seems like it is a gimmick right now to the vast majority of the public. There isn't anything wrong with pointing that out. It's not guaranteed to be the future of display tech no matter how much I hear it on GAF. People like their tvs, doing other stuff at the same time, hanging out with other people in the room, eating, etc. They don't want to strap into a headset for hours in a month, much less in a day. Even if there is content you have to break the barrier of having time to consume it. You can make the argument that video games in general suffer from the same problem, but it isn't quite the same, as you can still do it and multitask. With VR you really can't.

I hear alot of "they don't want to strap into a headset for hours" coming out of you. Speak for yourself. After playing Resident Evil 7 in VR for hours of pure immersion, I'm fully convinced of the power of this medium. It's something you simply CANNOT replicate on a television. That's not a gimmick in any way.

It doesn't have to be "the future of display tech". It's simply going to be "one" of the futures of display tech. TV is not going to go away. I understand that not everybody likes to be fully immersed in VR, but there's many of us that do, and in the future, it will be so good and comfortable, that I think many more will like it too. It's simply going to be it's own medium in the future, alongside many other forms of entertainment. The defense force is merely pointing out the potential power that the VR medium has, something that the impatient VR naysayers try to deny. This is the first gen of VR, if it sucks in 10 years (it won't), then we can talk.

 

[pelican]

theres been a game drought for vr for a few months itll pick up again once the big hitters start coming out

What big hitters?

I'm going to get Farpoint and Star Trek for my PSVR when they ship. Not sure what is on the horizon after that.

 

[VindicatorZ]

What big hitters?

I'm going to get Farpoint and Star Trek for my PSVR when they ship. Not sure what is on the horizon after that.

The ones you just mentioned. Here's hoping we'll get some good announcements at E3.

 

[ZOONAMI]

I hear alot of "they don't want to strap into a headset for hours" coming out of you. Speak for yourself. After playing Resident Evil 7 in VR for hours of pure immersion, I'm fully convinced of the power of this medium. It's something you simply CANNOT replicate on a television. That's not a gimmick in any way.

It doesn't have to be "the future of display tech". It's simply going to be "one" of the futures of display tech. TV is not going to go away. I understand that not everybody likes to be fully immersed in VR, but there's many of us that do, and in the future, it will be so good and comfortable, that I think many more will like it too. It's simply going to be it's own medium in the future, alongside many other forms of entertainment. The defense force is merely pointing out the potential power that the VR medium has, something that the impatient VR naysayers try to deny. This is the first gen of VR, if it sucks in 10 years (it won't), then we can talk.

I'm not saying there isn't an audience, but I don't think there really is that large of an audience that wants to strap in and play VR RE7 for hours. Even when you look at the usage statistics for traditional gaming it's staggering how little people are using gaming boxes for gaming. That's the hurdle. VR doesn't really have a practical use case outside of dedicated gaming and porn. It's not to say there isn't an audience, just not a mainstream audience where a whole family is going to sit down and strap on headsets to watch a movie. They do that with their PS4s and Xboxs all the time. The average household doesn't see the utility.

If gaming boxes were $800+ and didn't have any uses other than gaming you'd see Sales likely along what we've seen for VR.

 

[VindicatorZ]

I'm not saying there isn't an audience, but I don't think there really is that large of an audience that wants to strap in and play VR RE7 for hours. Even when you look at the usage statistics for traditional gaming it's staggering how little people are using gaming boxes for gaming. That's the hurdle. VR doesn't really have a practical use case outside of dedicated gaming and porn. It's not to say there isn't an audience, just not a mainstream audience where a whole family is going to sit down and strap on headsets to watch a movie. They do that with their PS4s and Xboxs all the time. The average household doesn't see the utility.

In the future when the headset is super lightweight and wireless, it will be much more comfortable and accessible to use.

When the screen resolution and field of view are drastically improved, something like 360 movies will finally be viable. Digital tourism, education, you name it.

Quality and Ergonomics are the two biggest factors. And they are sure to improve, it just needs time. In the meantime, it's quite good enough for enthusiasts like myself who can look past the flaws and enjoy it for what it is now.

EDIT: And I completely understand what you mean about people not using their consoles for gaming. That IS a big hurdle. However, I feel like when the right killer app title is made, and the hardware is good enough, it will be a success. It will only be as good as the software. What will be the milestone for VR gaming? Half Life 3? Elder Scrolls VR? GTA6? Call of Duty VR? I don't know. But in the future, it will be made, and the experience will be worth it.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

I'm not saying there isn't an audience, but I don't think there really is that large of an audience that wants to strap in and play VR RE7 for hours. Even when you look at the usage statistics for traditional gaming it's staggering how little people are using gaming boxes for gaming. That's the hurdle. VR doesn't really have a practical use case outside of dedicated gaming and porn. It's not to say there isn't an audience, just not a mainstream audience where a whole family is going to sit down and strap on headsets to watch a movie. They do that with their PS4s and Xboxs all the time. The average household doesn't see the utility.

If gaming boxes were $800+ and didn't have any uses other than gaming you'd see Sales likely along what we've seen for VR.

Nah man. It has a lot of industrial and educational use. Training for medical. There's interest in it for training auto mechanics to replace having to use actual cars for every student. Making games. Animating. Interior design and architecture. Therapy. Virtual tourism. Virtual classroom trips. That's just off the top of my head. Plenty of applications outside games and porn.

 

[Canklestank]

Meanwhile...

link

I don't think VR is going anywhere. The gaming side of it may take a while to really take off, or perhaps it never will, but I think calling the medium dead now is a bit premature, tbh.

 

[VindicatorZ]

Nah man. It has a lot of industrial and educational use. Training for medical. There's interest in it for training auto mechanics to replace having to use actual cars for every student. Making games. Animating. Interior design and architecture. Therapy. Virtual tourism. Virtual classroom trips. That's just off the top of my head. Plenty of applications outside games and porn.

Yes to all of this. But it's going to take more time. The hardware is not quite there yet. I recently went to a McAllen Whiskey tasting event, and to my surprise, they had like 30 Gear VR's set up giving people virtual tours of the McAllen Distillery. Turns out it was a terrible quality, blurry 360 degree video. It''s the kind of thing that if I didn't know any better would instantly turn me off to VR. It's just an example of how this kind of thing just needs time to mature, but some of these companies are trying to run before they can walk. It's going to be great in the future though, no doubt.

 

[Zepp Twofist]

I dunno. VR still impresses me every single week and has done so consistently for a year. There are tons of refinements to be had, but I don't see a future where VR isn't a factor.

 

[yyr]

I hear alot of "they don't want to strap into a headset for hours" coming out of you. Speak for yourself.

Think about the mainstream consumer. What are the most popular ways they consume entertainment these days?

1) smartphones/tablets
2) TV (more specifically, a variety of things displayed on a TV, including Netflix/similar, video games, or actual TV from a cable/fiber/satellite company)
3) multitasking with a combination of the above

And guess what? 3) happens a lot. A LOT. For a lot of people, it's more often than not. And you can't check your phone if you're wearing goggles. That would make VR completely incompatible with how the average person consumes entertainment in 2017. I'm not saying that this won't change in the future, but this is the way it is right now.

I don't think it should necessarily be included with PS5, but the Kinect comparisons never cease to amaze me. It's a completely different thing that has gotten a completely different response from developers.

But how different is it, really?

Looking past the obvious major difference in interface:

- both are pricey add-ons for a PC or game console (with VR being even more pricey)
- both struggled/are struggling to find developers willing to go all in on quality content for them
- both have some amazing games amidst many generic and/or mediocre and/or poorly-executed games

They sure do have quite a bit in common, except maybe that VR has a future in video gaming. It's just not going to happen yet IMO.

 

[keraj37]

I borrowed an Oculus and the touch controllers from work for a week, and 3 days was all it took for the novelty to wear off. After that I barely touched it. We've got every VR kit at work, and after a flurry of activity last year, nobody really uses them anymore. That tells me that the cost isn't the only issue. They are just too fussy to set up, and there are very few games that people want to go back to. Everyone who has used it comes away suitably impressed but the novelty is short-lived and they soon stop coming back.

Somehow I have to agree. There is something off in VR and I am saying that as exVive owner.

All those who are saying that we need to wait for next iteration, next gen of VR I think are very likely to be mistaken.

Compering VR v1.0 (if we can call this iteration version 1.0) to early stages of video gaming in general is misleading - just keep in mind that every young person dreamed about new Commodore 64, ZX Spectrum etc, and they were all in it.
From my low level perspective it is not happening with VR (as also says post I am quoting).

There is just something off with it...

It will be free of wires soon enough, but for me the biggest breakthrough will be in screen quality. Once we are getting 8k resolution per eye, along with a 200 degree field of view, at 90 FPS with games made in the newest engines of the future (Unreal Engine 5, Cry Engine 4, etc) I expect this to be absolutely incredible. This may take 5-10 years from now, but it WILL happen one day, and it's going to be amazing.

Maybe you are right, but do you remember great movie called 2001: A Space Odyssey? Well in 2001 nothing was like Kubrick imagined.

 

[Compsiox]

Oh of course some of you saw this as an opportunity to try to say "I WAS RIGHT, VR IS A FAILING FAD"

I don't understand why people are so negative about VR. The more negative you are about it and how it won't be worth it for 10 years is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If everyone doesn't buy it until it's better, it won't get better.

People still underestimate VR thinking it's the new wii or something. All of this is really not complicated. It's cool technology that needs more quality games. That's it.

People are afraid of change. Always have, always will be.

 

[ZOONAMI]

Nah man. It has a lot of industrial and educational use. Training for medical. There's interest in it for training auto mechanics to replace having to use actual cars for every student. Making games. Animating. Interior design and architecture. Therapy. Virtual tourism. Virtual classroom trips. That's just off the top of my head. Plenty of applications outside games and porn.

Yeah it's true it does have business/educational use. That is what is going to drive continued VR improvements moreso than mainstream adoption, at least for a while.

 

[Rygar 8 Bit]

What big hitters?

I'm going to get Farpoint and Star Trek for my PSVR when they ship. Not sure what is on the horizon after that.

coming at this from vive i consider psvr to be vr light and by big titles im talking about valves 3 exclusive full production vr games and fallout 4

edit: maybe calling it vr light is a little harsh but i just feel most of the bigger things will be coming to the 2 full room scale experiences

 

[Drakendodertje]

Nothing will kill VR.
At worst the current iteration will phase out, but VR as a concept is so integral to the concept of entertainment and storytelling, that is actually, undoubtedly, the ending point of everything videogames and similar entertainment are trying to do, especially escapism based ones.

100% agreed and well put. I fail to understand why so few people can see this. VR is the endgame for all media, plain and simple.

 

[Pizza]

I'll adopt VR eventually, but as it stands, there just isn't enough content I'm interested in that can justify the cost of the hardware.

This is where I was before VR launched, and this is where I am now.

I really really really want it, maybe Black Friday will be good

 

[Peroroncino]

Not really surprised, apart from Elite Dangerous in VR there isn't really any other game that makes me think 'holy shit I need that'.

 

[Papo Swing]

With some of the comments here I feel that VR is just going the route of most l peripherals of the past years.

They are great hardware ideas that are never executed properly because either no one cares to dedicate the time to make something good or a lot of shovelware is created which in the end makes people think it sucks and turns them against the tech.

 

[Nickle]

VR needs something big like Half Life 3 to really get people interested in it.

 

[Rygar 8 Bit]

VR needs something big like Half Life 3 to really get people interested in it.

the valve 3
half life 3
portal 3
left 4 dead 3
believe

 

[Compsiox]

VR needs something big like Half Life 3 to really get people interested in it.

Valve is making 3 full VR titles. We'll just have to wait and see.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

100% agreed and well put. I fail to understand why so few people can see this. VR is the endgame for all media, plain and simple.

Let's not get crazy now. Even if we're talking about VR in a wide context (ie the Holodeck or the Matrix), I don't think it's a forgone conclusion. "Media" is a very wide term and VR won't be the end all for all of it anymore than TV is today.

 

[Oersted]

I think the biggest issue with Virtual Reality that it is a additional device in the vein Vita TV was or smartwatches are now.

It adds value for those who bought into the ecosystem, it is not really a ecosystem on its own. Smartphones are, PCs are and of course consoles are. VR devices are addons with limited value, which noone truly needs.

I guess VR needs to become a standard, not a bonus.

 

[r3ddvil]

VR will suffer the same fate as 3D.

No one wants to wear shit on their face.

 

[Compsiox]

VR will suffer the same fate as 3D.

No one wants to wear shit on their face.

.