Support NeoGAF

[a secret-boss]

Motion sensor, 3D TV, and mobile HD screens are all small steps leading into this.

I do hope VR succeeds, because the current gen consoles seems stagnant (remasters anyone?). hopefully VR brings the spark of creativity and bring Japanese devs back

 

[bj00rn_]

3rd person does only fit better for the first few seconds of thinking, then you realize that you not only have the same problems

Not sure I understand, this is coming from your personal hands on experience with VR in third person?

Well, not in my experience.. And I've seen similar opinions from quite a few other people concerning this as well.

 

[MaxiLive]

I don't think VR will be the next evolution for gaming and even 5-10 years from now the norm will be to play games on a 2D screen.

I do however think VR will be successful and for the core fans a must have device in about 3-5 years once the experiences are crafted for it and the technology catches up. I can't see many large titles being designed around VR though as the market is going to be so small for a publisher to invest in.

The smaller developer studios/indie will flourish though providing unique and totally new experiences as well as crafting similar games of today in a totally new perspective. Personally after using a DK2 kit for a while I don't think I would be using VR for most of my gaming experiences in the coming years as it is still going to be a faff to setup and the discomfort of using it compared to sitting on the couch with a controller.

I always compare to a high end gaming accessory such a a racing wheel or flight stick, they add so much to the experience but won't suit every game or situation when you want to play. The difference being with VR is that it would probably be seen as more cost effective to most consumers as it offers a lot more experiences.

 

[InaudibleWhispa]

Yes, someone should. I don't see a difference here, if you want to go the "it's like you're looking at the playing field of the game" angle, how would easy stuff like rotating the camera fit into that natural movement scheme? Not even thinking about switching to manual aim, entering buildings and tiny caverns and other problems.

3rd person does only fit better for the first few seconds of thinking, then you realize that you not only have the same problems (joypad walking, rotating, camera movement vs actual head movement) but quite some on top of that.

What problems? If you're playing a game in 3rd person with VR, you use a controller and play it exactly the same as you do now. The only difference is your head is the camera instead of the right analogue stick. It's an incredibly cool perspective feeling like you're in the environment controlling a little guy below you, and your head gives you extra freedom to really get a good look at things as you can lean forward to look closer, or move to the side to look around or under things.

The problem with first person is that for some people they feel sick when you run around fast turning with an analogue stick instead of your head, as it's disconnected from what your senses are telling you your body is doing. There are software tricks to get around it, but it's certainly not a problem inherent to a third person perspective as you're sitting still moving something else in your environment. When you quickly run forward and turn left in third person, the camera (your head) isn't going to rapidly move forward and swing left, which is the cause of sickness in first person, so it isn't an issue. You're don't feel like you're inhabiting a body that is moving differently to your own.

 

[aeroslash]

I trully think so. There are too many awesome guys working on VR to not suceed. I think it's the next big experience to have in a videogame, and once we taste it, nothing will ever be the same again.

I made a topic about the Nintendo On creators working on it.

http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1015714&page=100000#footer

 

[Peltz]

I tried VR at PAX East and it is definitely NOT a gimmick.

The only comparable feeling was when I first played Super Mario 64. It felt like a brand new evolution of our hobby that will change everything.

 

[LastNac]

I'm not saying it needs to be anything. I don't think conventional video games will go away as long as we have screens, they'll just be there along with board games. I think a lot of AAA developers and publishers are going to start gravitating to this because it brings out the aspects of gaming almost all of us here really care about, that is what I said.

Very, very doubtful.


The truth is VR has its limitations. I'm fairly certain we will always want 3rd person games for example

Honestly, the experience is best when it is designed around VR and not all genres are applicable to that approach.

 

[a secret-boss]

Very, very doubtful.


The truth is VR has its limitations. I'm fairly certain we will always want 3rd person games for example

Honestly, the experience is best when it is designed around VR and not all genres are applicable to that approach.

there are some 3rd person games on VR

 

[The Horror the horror]

Means the ultimate death of local co-op, IMO.

How much would it cost to purchase multiple units of these for a single household to enjoy?

 

[LastNac]

there are some 3rd person games on VR

Yes, I've played some myself.

And the effect is lost on them.

 

[I H8 Memes]

Yes, I've played some myself.

And the effect is lost on them.

The effect maybe, but these are still 3d games a perfect peripheral view. there is still incredible depth a feeling that you are in this place rather than viewing it on a screen.

Even at it's worst VR is still superior to traditional screens because you could just play the game on an enormous screen inside of VR. You could be sitting in the Dallas Cowboys stadium playing a game on their ridiculous jumbotron instead of playing a game on a normal tv screen.

 

[Moon_frogger]

Is motion controls? Is 3d? Has any peripheral gaming device, even a cheap one ever been anything but a commercial failure? Answer these questions and you have your answer. 'Profitable niche', is the best vr can hope for when it comes to video games, and that's being generous.

 

[Nafai1123]

I think VR will be a bigger revelation in gaming that the development of 3d games.

 

[bj00rn_]

Yes, I've played some myself.

And the effect is lost on them.

What do you mean. What is lost? I was critical to third person VR games, until I tried a few. Now I think they at the moment work a lot better than non-seated first person VR games, and some even work better than on a conventional display.

 

[LastNac]

The effect maybe, but these are still 3d games a perfect peripheral view. there is still incredible depth a feeling that you are in this place rather than viewing it on a screen.

Even at it's worst VR is still superior to traditional screens because you could just play the game on an enormous screen inside of VR. You could be sitting in the Dallas Cowboys stadium playing a game on their ridiculous jumbotron instead of playing a game on a normal tv screen.

Isn't he whole point of VR is to force your perception of "immersion?" To "put you in the world" as far as your senses go?

It works with first person becuase the effect is 1:1. The characters eyes are your eyes, his view your view, etc.

That's all lost on 3rd person. The effect is pretty much just sitting really close to the screen. There is no "hey, I'm in this world now" sensation because the avatar in front of your nose is a constant reminder of the disconnect.

 

[hohoXD123]

Isn't he whole point of VR is to force your perception of "immersion?" To "put you in the world" as far as your senses go?

It works with first person becuase the effect is 1:1. The characters eyes are your eyes, his view your view, etc.

That's all lost on 3rd person. The effect is pretty much just sitting really close to the screen. There is no "hey, I'm in this world now" sensation because the avatar in front of your nose is a constant reminder of the disconnect.

You can still get a sense of immersion in 3rd person. You're no longer thinking that you're the character themselves but an onlooker who can control the character while looking around the world from your position. Not as profound as 1st person but it's pretty cool regardless and there is still the "hey, I'm in this world now" feeling.

 

[gunslikewhoa]

Isn't he whole point of VR is to force your perception of "immersion?" To "put you in the world" as far as your senses go?

It works with first person becuase the effect is 1:1. The characters eyes are your eyes, his view your view, etc.

That's all lost on 3rd person. The effect is pretty much just sitting really close to the screen. There is no "hey, I'm in this world now" sensation because the avatar in front of your nose is a constant reminder of the disconnect.

You haven't played proper third person games built for VR at all if you believe this.

 

[VindicatorZ]

Isn't he whole point of VR is to force your perception of "immersion?" To "put you in the world" as far as your senses go?

It works with first person becuase the effect is 1:1. The characters eyes are your eyes, his view your view, etc.

That's all lost on 3rd person. The effect is pretty much just sitting really close to the screen. There is no "hey, I'm in this world now" sensation because the avatar in front of your nose is a constant reminder of the disconnect.

Nope, 3rd person works fantastic in VR. You still have a first person perspective , only you are the camera controlling an avatar in front of you. It works great, and is still highly immersive.

 

[Natureboy99]

Disclaimer: I haven't tried any kind of VR set-up whatsoever, yet. Any and all of my opinions are thus based on what I've read or head from other opinion pieces, and from cobbled together clips of what the experience is supposed to look like.

In my opinion, I think VR is something that gaming will explore, but I still see several limitations and/or design considerations that make me wonder how viable the platform is for video games in its entirety.

I think one of the biggest reasons I find it hard to fully commit to VR is because I ask myself: how would Dark Souls work in a VR setup? While VR is perfectly attuned to games that feature first-person perspectives, there are several genres of games that I enjoy that don't really work with a VR perspective.

Genres like fighting games, third person character action games (e.g. Devil May Cry, Bayonetta), platformers like Mario, strategy games like Civ or FF:T - these are all games that arguably work better with a flat screen. VR doesn't really offer you much in those settings, though I guess you could argue that they may benefit from some element or design that we haven't yet fathomed. (You could also make an entirely different about how those genres are dying, and how VR may represent the evolution of a new set or style of games - but that's neither here nor there for this topic's breadth.)

Until then, I find VR as a neat novelty - similar to how I view the Kinect, or how the Wii's motion controls have basically been phased out going into the Wii U. It's curious, it's cool, it's the new thing on the block: but I don't think it's meant to stay in this medium for long.

VR headsets work with every genre and every point of view. Some games will just use it to immerse you into the world more, but in essence will act like a 3D TV strapped to your head but no motion controls or head tracking. 3rd person action games will look and feel the same (play with a Dualshock 4), but instead of your view being limited by the border of your TV, there will be no border and all your vision will see the game in 3D.

 

[Genio88]

I've got an HMZ-T1 which is not VR but simulate a movie theater screen, i barely use it for gaming, i prefer use it to watch movies and TV shows, playing a game for 2+ hours with something like that on your face isn't that comfortable from my experience, i use it from time to time for gaming but my 32 inch TV is still my main way for gaming, i guess it'll be like that even after VR, also because i think we're not gonna see lots of full games support it but a few indies and some experiment, at least for the next few years.

 

[LastNac]

You haven't played proper third person games built for VR at all if you believe this.

Well there was that one platformer at E3 and Sony's demo at PSX.

Both failed to achieve what they attempted.

Also as a fan of fixed camera angles I don't see how the presentation could be improved any further.

 

[Nintendojitsu]

Wish i was born in 2050 so I could experience Sword Art Online :l.

You have bad taste in anime Sir or madam. Please fix this!

 

[Moon_frogger]

I don't even like wearing my gaming headset for more than a couple of hours. I can't imagine gaming with a TV strapped to my face.

 

[wanderingprostheyltite]

if a video game just focuses on gameplay and nothing else it's considered casual for the most part.

Not sure what you were trying to say with this but surface level absolutely not.

I do believe VR to be the next step, and it'll only continue to evolve as haptics and other aspects that simulate various senses like smell develop alongside the hmds. I think asynchronous gameplay could come back in a big way, take a look at this video of a game where one person wears the hmd and others read from a book describing how to dismantle a bomb:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7Mxd-LbfNI

It's an exciting time for the medium, and there's gonna be more experimentation with different control schemes and gameplay types than there has been cumulatively in game development for probably the past decade (sans motion games). I can't wait to see what kind of experiences people come up with, and the social implications alone for the tech are enormous. It will bring a whole new dimension to multiplayer gaming, and the feeling of "presence" of your buddies alongside you will make it that much more compelling. It's gonna git gud for gaming when it comes to VR.

 

[Genio88]

I don't even like wearing my gaming headset for more than a couple of hours. I can't imagine gaming with a TV strapped to my face.

Yes that's indeed the main issue with these technology, as i said though it's good for watching movie on it where you don't have to interact or other stuff, just watch it like you're in a cinema.

 

[Nintendojitsu]

Not sure what you were trying to say with this but surface level absolutely not.

I do believe VR to be the next step, and it'll only continue to evolve as haptics and other aspects that simulate various senses like smell develop alongside the hmds. I think asynchronous gameplay could come back in a big way, take a look at this video of a game where one person wears the hmd and others read from a book describing how to dismantle a bomb:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7Mxd-LbfNI

It's an exciting time for the medium, and there's gonna be more experimentation with different control schemes and gameplay types than there has been cumulatively in game development for probably the past decade (sans motion games). I can't wait to see what kind of experiences people come up with, and the social implications alone for the tech are enormous. It will bring a whole new dimension to multiplayer gaming, and the feeling of "presence" of your buddies alongside you will make it that much more compelling. It's gonna git gud for gaming when it comes to VR.

What are they using to interact with?

 

[bj00rn_]

Isn't he whole point of VR is to force your perception of "immersion?" To "put you in the world" as far as your senses go?

It works with first person becuase the effect is 1:1. The characters eyes are your eyes, his view your view, etc.

That's all lost on 3rd person. The effect is pretty much just sitting really close to the screen. There is no "hey, I'm in this world now" sensation because the avatar in front of your nose is a constant reminder of the disconnect.

That's an extremely extrapolated theoretical point of view for no good reason. In practice third person view most times works very well in VR, most times better than non-seated fpv.

Here's a video with some interesting information about developing third person games for VR, and contains also a story about why the developer Playful actually abandoned some of its non-seated first person development for third person.

Oculus Connect: Learning from Lucky's Tale
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbiioTWaY2E&list=WL&index=5

 

[bj00rn_]

I don't even like wearing my gaming headset for more than a couple of hours. I can't imagine gaming with a TV strapped to my face.

I can assure you that's not exactly how it works.. It's more like sticking your head through an open window to look outside or inside into another world. If the experience is done properly it should feel completely natural. The HMD itself is usually the first thing you forget that you wear. Most people tend to forget it after a few seconds. At least that's how it has been when I've demoed both the DK1 and the DK2 to people during the last couple of years..

I sometimes even do 3-5 hour sessions playing Elite Dangerous in VR these days, or at least 1-2 hours 4-5 times a week. I feel almost no fatigue (except the dev-kit's straps are not very ergonomical..). And this is a "just a shitty devkit".. We'll have Google Glass-like HMDs soon enough.

 

[LastNac]

That's an extremely extrapolated theoretical point of view for no good reason. In practice third person view most times works very well in VR, most times better than non-seated fpv.

Here's a video with some interesting information about developing third person games for VR, and contains also a story about why the developer Playful actually abandoned some of its non-seated first person development for third person.

Oculus Connect: Learning from Lucky's Tale
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbiioTWaY2E&list=WL&index=5

I'm sorry, but I'd rather be critical of the practice than romanticize it past a point of flaws. VR is not the "be all end all" some make it out to be.

I've tried a handful of demos and from my experience of first person view, when designed for the technology(looking at you A:I) achieves the true purpose of the technique. I think it will be a fun avenue but I can't see it being more than niche, both in the industry as well as my personal tastes.

I'm a fan of cinematic presentation. That means loving Black Bars, dynamic and fixed camera angles, and playing with size scope. Playing a traditional God of War game with VR would be a nightmare. Or Uncharted for that fact.

Believe it or not, we can still live in a world where some things do things better than others and vice verse.

 

[YuShtink]

I'm sorry, but I'd rather be critical of the practice than romanticize it past a point of flaws. VR is not the "be all end all" some make it out to be.

I've tried a handful of demos and from my experience of first person view, when designed for the technology(looking at you A:I) achieves the true purpose of the technique. I think it will be a fun avenue but I can't see it being more than niche, both in the industry as well as my personal tastes.

I'm a fan of cinematic presentation. That means loving Black Bars, dynamic and fixed camera angles, and playing with size scope. Playing a traditional God of War game with VR would be a nightmare. Or Uncharted for that fact.

Believe it or not, we can still live in a world where some things do things better than others and vice verse.

Nope, it would still be far cooler than playing the same game on a flat TV.

 

[Overside]

Just stepping in with a slight technicality here.

VR is virtual reality. In order for something to be vr, it needs to emulate reality... er, virtually that means not only does it need to be 3d, and have 1:1 head tracking so it looks where you look, but it also needs absolute position tracking of inputs that would represent your hands in game, for you to interact with the virtual world. At the very least absolute position tracking with a button that can dictate when you want to grab something, or let go, and the position of those hands responding 1:1 to the position of your hands, with exceptions for problems like collisions having workable solutions (your real hand doesnt stop when it comes into contact with a virtual wall, so it snaps back to position once your real hand is in a state the virtual hand can be in as well).

If its 3rd person, and not motion controlled, its not actually vr. Its stereoscopic 3d, and the headtracking for the camera is really cool, reeeeeally cool, but its not virtual reality, its just 3d with head tracking slaved to camera movement.

Admittedly, by definition, virtual reality will be limited to some pretty narrow genre tropes, it would still be extreeeeeeeeeemely cool, even just for a puzzle game, where you have to find out how to et out of a room and move on to the next, where youhave to pull drawers out of desks and shakeout their contents to find a key or a clue, real cool, visceral, dextrous, interactive stuff with tons of potential.

However, head tracking 3d, or inserting the player into the world like they were the camera, as opposed to the entity itself, would not be bound by such narrow restrictions, and could still be third person and quite gamey.

 

[bj00rn_]

I'm sorry, but I'd rather be critical of the practice than romanticize it past a point of flaws. VR is not the "be all end all" some make it out to be.

I've tried a handful of demos and from my experience of first person view, when designed for the technology(looking at you A:I) achieves the true purpose of the technique. I think it will be a fun avenue but I can't see it being more than niche, both in the industry as well as my personal tastes.

I'm a fan of cinematic presentation. That means loving Black Bars, dynamic and fixed camera angles, and playing with size scope. Playing a traditional God of War game with VR would be a nightmare. Or Uncharted for that fact.

Believe it or not, we can still live in a world where some things do things better than others and vice verse.

Ah, and there it is.. If you had informed us that this was all somewhat agenda-driven from the get go then we could all have saved our energy for a better discussion.

I'm sorry, but I'd rather be critical of the practice than romanticize it past a point of flaws. VR is not the "be all end all" some make it out to be.

"Romanticize"? That's a first.. And even a "be all end all".. "I'm sorry", but I can't stand platitudes.

I have a feeling that you don't have much of an extended hands on experience with third person VR, because the way you're writing doesn't make much sense for a person that has extended hands on experience with it.

 

[philsuf]

For VR to be successful for me it means that they would have to show their proficiency in other entertainment industries, such as the movie industry (VR movie -- not necessarily porn, though)

 

[jrush64]

Yeah I set up Oculus Rift for my school yesterday to test. I played for only 5 minutes and I got a headache for the rest of the day... I don't know about VR man.

 

[bj00rn_]

Just stepping in with a slight technicality here.

VR is virtual reality. In order for something to be vr, it needs to emulate reality... er, virtually that means not only does it need to be 3d, and have 1:1 head tracking so it looks where you look, but it also needs absolute position tracking of inputs that would represent your hands in game, for you to interact with the virtual world. At the very least absolute position tracking with a button that can dictate when you want to grab something, or let go, and the position of those hands responding 1:1 to the position of your hands, with exceptions for problems like collisions having workable solutions (your real hand doesnt stop when it comes into contact with a virtual wall, so it snaps back to position once your real hand is in a state the virtual hand can be in as well).

If its 3rd person, and not motion controlled, its not actually vr. Its stereoscopic 3d, and the headtracking for the camera is really cool, reeeeeally cool, but its not virtual reality, its just 3d with head tracking slaved to camera movement.

Admittedly, by definition, virtual reality will be limited to some pretty narrow genre tropes, it would still be extreeeeeeeeeemely cool, even just for a puzzle game, where you have to find out how to et out of a room and move on to the next, where youhave to pull drawers out of desks and shakeout their contents to find a key or a clue, real cool, visceral, dextrous, interactive stuff with tons of potential.

However, head tracking 3d, or inserting the player into the world like they were the camera, as opposed to the entity itself, would not be bound by such narrow restrictions, and could still be third person and quite gamey.

I just can't believe what I'm reading in this thread..

You even kinda managed to omit every single seated experience in the process!

What about people with sight on only one eye, are they not a part of reality? What about blind people? What about paralysed people with "no head nor positional tracking"?Vanished in a puff of smoke?

Try this experiment: Right now look around in the room that you're in. Now, close one of your eyes.. Did you leave reality..? Of course not.. Now close both your eyes.. Still here..? Of course you are. Virtual reality is obviously not quite bound by the artificial limits that you put up earlier in your post. What you are talking about is varying levels of immersion within VR.

You could rather say VR is much about presence, a presence that definitely does not require stereoscopy (It is a nice icing on the cake though). And even that isn't linear. Nothing is absolute, everything is relative. VR is very much also including third person, just in a different way.

Yeah I set up Oculus Rift for my school yesterday to test. I played for only 5 minutes and I got a headache for the rest of the day... I don't know about VR man.

I can assure you that VR is not meant to be inducing headaches in people.. VR is supposed to deliver a smooth natural flow of presence. This is exactly why people should not "just set up Oculus Rift", and exactly why it's called a "development kit"; it is not meant for consumers, they are very crude unfinished devices that has to be properly set up and individually tailored. I hope it wasn't a DK1, because that's an even narrower and more demanding device to demo.

I spent 3-4 hours in the DK1 one of the first days I bought it, and ended up with a horrible motion sickness that lasted for almost a week.. I didn't even know there was a thing called "IPD" and "sweet spot"...and positional tracking..and low persistance...and..yeah..

 

[Muskieratboi]

Yeah I set up Oculus Rift for my school yesterday to test. I played for only 5 minutes and I got a headache for the rest of the day... I don't know about VR man.

One does not just "Set up a Rift" and expect it to work. The currently available ones are NOT meant for that. They're Devkits that require per-user and per-computer optimization, especially the DK1. There's a reason those things come with three sets of lenses, dude!

 

[jrush64]

I can assure you that VR is not meant to be inducing headaches in people.. VR is supposed to deliver a smooth natural flow of presence. This is exactly why people should not "just set up Oculus Rift", and exactly why it's called a "development kit"; it is not meant for consumers, they are very crude unfinished devices that has to be properly set up and individually tailored. I hope it wasn't a DK1, because that's an even narrower and more demanding device to demo.

I spent 3-4 hours in the DK1 one of the first days I bought it, and ended up with a horrible motion sickness that lasted for almost a week.. I didn't even know there was a thing called "IPD" and "sweet spot"...and positional tracking..and low persistance...and..yeah..

It was DK2. I tried out the South Park Demo and one space game called Trials of something. All I know is I got a pretty bad headache after using it. Doesn't mean it wasn't cool though.

 

[HanzoHasashiVSBi-Han]

another gimmick that will come and go, but I'd love to be wrong...

 

[Seanspeed]

Isn't he whole point of VR is to force your perception of "immersion?" To "put you in the world" as far as your senses go?

It works with first person becuase the effect is 1:1. The characters eyes are your eyes, his view your view, etc.

That's all lost on 3rd person. The effect is pretty much just sitting really close to the screen. There is no "hey, I'm in this world now" sensation because the avatar in front of your nose is a constant reminder of the disconnect.

I'm gonna have to suspect that you didn't actually try any 3rd person experiences in VR, despite your claim. I think anybody who has would understand why this is assumption is wrong.

If you look at a piece of paper in front of you, do you not consider the paper to be a part of reality? A character in VR is no different. It is not an 'avatar'. It is not supposed to be you. You simply control it. Yet your visual perspective is still put there in the game. Your eyes/head become the camera. And that is still incredibly cool and wildly different from playing on a traditional screen. It does not lose any sense of being VR.

 

[NewGame]

VR is so intrusive, expencive, isolating and cumbersome with its motion sickness and eye strain- I highly doubt it will become mainstream. If anything it will be treated like those steering wheel and peddle attachments for existing games, nice to have but specifically for the enthusiast.

 

[PelekotansDream]

This is going to be really negative but as someone that studied human factors in University I don't think this will work. For some people they will love it and can use these VR headsets with no issues but there will be a group of people getting neck pains, eye soreness or that generally find it sweaty and annoying to wear for long periods of time. In addition to that, as gaming has now become social with things like Twitch I dunno if that will work well with VR technology.

 

[Seanspeed]

A properly configured device shouldn't give anybody eye strain.

 

[Sh1ner]

VR is so intrusive, expencive, isolating and cumbersome with its motion sickness and eye strain- I highly doubt it will become mainstream. If anything it will be treated like those steering wheel and peddle attachments for existing games, nice to have but specifically for the enthusiast.

Technology improves over time. Majority of these issues will disappear or become less of an issue.

 

[Nozem]

Maybe in a decade or two, when a VR headset will be the same size as a regular pair of glasses. Until then it will never have mass appeal.

 

[OBias]

I was watching old Sega-related videos on YouTube and found something related to this thread: https://youtu.be/PmYDE87zrLw?t=5m9s

In 2000 GameSpot TV interviewed Yu Suzuki about the upcoming first chapter of the Shenmue series. While talking about his new FREE concept he basically says that Shenmue is meant to be a step towards the Virtual Reality experience. Fifteen years ago Yu Suzuki believed that in the future "people will be wearing head-mounted displays and walking around in virtual reality towns", back when the VR was dead and buried. This is quite fascinating.