• 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.

Dev: Next Xbox Console May Not Have VR, Microsoft shows no interest in it.

Is it a good or bad thing that Microsoft is not participating in VR?


  • Total voters
    249
MR is a very niche enterprise tool, they are releasing HL v2.0 but the product is very niche and at $3,500, its not even close to being a real tool. VR is mostly a niche game device, probably the next gen hardware will make it better but its like MR, it will always be niche. Furthermore, VR is a no go as far as running from Azure unless you want people barfing all over so long-term limited future for Microsoft. I would not be surprised by HL being canned at some point - if they can't reduce the size. Since the processing is heavily done locally on HL, the cloud has less to do with it and is not impacted by Microsoft moving OS to the cloud, generally speaking.

HL can probably be used with some other devices (phones tablets, watches) as well at some point. If you are moving to cloud processing VR is not going to happen there, so all this basically makes sense to me.

If the future is cloud, VR is not a part of that future because of barfing.
You're out of your mind if you think either VR or MR is forever going to be niche as you put it. This is about as ridiculous as claiming the world only has need for 5 computers, or that the Internet will be a fad. Expect MR/VR to be just as if not more popular than smartphones. Logic says this will happen.

Also, HoloLens 2 relies more on cloud processing than it's predecessor. They want to rely more and more on the cloud as time goes on. As long as latency is sub 20 ms, then VR sickness via latency won't be an issue.
 
Last edited:
So why did they show Hololens at E3?
They jumped the gun there. HoloLens obviously has gaming appeal, but AR was years (and is still 1-2 years) away from being a consumer product. HoloLens no longer marketed itself for consumers or Xbox after a certain period, Microsoft realizing that they need to temper expectations until they can actually release it for consumers.
 

azz0r

Banned
As someone whos bought and sold a PSVR - while the experience is great - there isn't enough meat on the bones to really justify it. Plus for it to be really viable there are lots of issues to solve around sickness, weight and development costs. I'd be keen to see all that resolved and make it central to the generation after.
 
They jumped the gun there. HoloLens obviously has gaming appeal, but AR was years (and is still 1-2 years) away from being a consumer product. HoloLens no longer marketed itself for consumers or Xbox after a certain period, Microsoft realizing that they need to temper expectations until they can actually release it for consumers.

Yeah i agree, and things are allowed to change.... Them announcing it at e3 doesnt set everything in stone forever. Ill never understand people that just dont understand that ideas and products can change and evolve.
 

DanielsM

Banned
You're out of your mind if you think either VR or MR is forever going to be niche as you put it. This is about as ridiculous as claiming the world only has need for 5 computers, or that the Internet will be a fad. Expect MR/VR to be just as if not more popular than smartphones. Logic says this will happen.

Also, HoloLens 2 relies more on cloud processing than it's predecessor. They want to rely more and more on the cloud as time goes on. As long as latency is sub 20 ms, then VR sickness via latency won't be an issue.

The visual processing of the HL is not done in the cloud, sorry, you don't understand how it works. That doesn't mean information couldn't be sent to the HL2. Please learn to slow down and read. Information can be sent put the processing of the graphics has to be done locally, in the case of HL its built in.

As far as your comment about MR/VR being some mass type devices, well, good luck... same thing they said 20 years ago. What you are saying is the same thing they were saying about web cams and than the Kinect, its a niche market. Maybe one day if they get AR down to the size of a mobile pair of sunglasses that you can walk around with you can have more of a market i.e. Google Glasses, but as far as what they have now its a niche device and market.

Logic says this will happen.

HIstory says otherwise, I bet you ask ole Zuck if he could get his $2b back for buying OR, he'll take it in in an instance, heck, my guess is he would probably let you have it for $100m.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/11/facebook-2-billion-bet-on-oculus-not-paying-off-commentary.html

Microsoft will probably stay in HL for the time being, but won't be surprised by them canning it. VR/MR is niche at best, MR is niche of niche right now.
 
Last edited:

Calibos

Member
I think its quite a leap to say MS has "No" interest in VR. They are funding a Halo VR experience and still R&D heavy in the mixed reality space. If it was financially viable to do VR for them, they would be in that arena in a hot minute., but VR has yet to prove itself out over the longterm save for Sony's solution. For MS right now, it's a simple risk vs. reward business decision in a niche market.
 
The visual processing of the HL is not done in the cloud, sorry, you don't understand how it works. That doesn't mean information couldn't be sent to the HL2. Please learn to slow down and read. Information can be sent put the processing of the graphics has to be done locally, in the case of HL its built in.

As far as your comment about MR/VR being some mass type devices, well, good luck... same thing they said 20 years ago. What you are saying is the same thing they were saying about web cams and than the Kinect, its a niche market. Maybe one day if they get AR down to the size of a mobile pair of sunglasses that you can walk around with you can have more of a market i.e. Google Glasses, but as far as what they have now its a niche device and market.



HIstory says otherwise, I bet you ask ole Zuck if he could get his $2b back for buying OR, he'll take it in in an instance, heck, my guess is he would probably let you have it for $100m.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/11/facebook-2-billion-bet-on-oculus-not-paying-off-commentary.html
Did I say the visual processing was done in the cloud? I said there's more reliance on the cloud, which is true. Persistent shared connections across multiple devices, including multiple headsets and mobile devices utilizes Microsoft Azure. I advise you learn how to read before telling others to do the same.

20 years ago, hardly anyone was doing anything in MR. VR had a bubble of hype back then, but it never gained any real R&D traction. The only consumer products released at the time were from small companies that few people have even heard of. It was far too early for both VR and MR. Now, R&D / investment, and the tech itself is speeding ahead at breakneck speeds on both the MR and VR front. The rate of progress is faster than most people could imagine.

Comparing it to Webcams and Kinect shows how little you even understand about the technologies. Please, do tell me how the very few niche uses of those devices compares to the vast array of mass-
consumer usecases of MR/VR?

If you weren't so lazy and did a shred of research, you'd see that Mark knew it would take a long time to take off. He wasn't expecting 50-100 million sales until 10 years after the Rift launched. He's now updated that to a billion, because he's become even more convinced over time.
 
Last edited:

DanielsM

Banned
Did I say the visual processing was done in the cloud? I said there's more reliance on the cloud, which is true. Persistent shared connections across multiple devices, including multiple headsets and mobile devices utilizes Microsoft Azure. I advise you learn how to read before telling others to do the same.

20 years ago, hardly anyone was doing anything in MR. VR had a bubble of hype back then, but it never gained any real R&D traction. The only consumer products released at the time were from small companies that few people have even heard of. It was far too early for both VR and MR. Now, R&D / investment, and the tech itself is speeding ahead at breakneck speeds on both the MR and VR front. The rate of progress is faster than most people could imagine.

Comparing it to Webcams and Kinect shows how little you even understand about the technologies. Please, do tell me how the very few niche uses of those devices compares to the vast array of mass-consumer usecases of MR/VR?

Look, you are not listening.... HL is processed locally, you are fighting with yourself. Yes, information can be sent from the cloud as long as the image is processed locally than its not an issue... for VR if the goal is to process the heavy stuff (the game) in the cloud, VR is not an option.

You're not reading.

Comparing it to Webcams and Kinect shows how little you even understand about the technologies. Please, do tell me how the very few niche uses of those devices compares to the vast array of mass-consumer usecases of MR/VR?

Exactly what the Kinect users said back then when everyone told them the limitations of the device and it would fade. These are niche type devices at best, for Facebook probably $2b down the tubes. Sony has done probably pretty decent but no its a niche at best.

"You don't understand the technology, Kinect support back in 2010" LOL
 
Last edited:

hargwood

Banned
Wise decision.

We don't need another Kinect situation.

VR still needs to iron out the adjustments for visual impairement and motion sickness. It also needs some actual fully fledged games to make use of it as something that truly enhances the experience rather than a gimmick.
 
Look, you are not listening.... HL is processed locally, you are fighting with yourself. Yes, information can be sent from the cloud as long as the image is processed locally than its not an issue... for VR if the goal is to process the heavy stuff (the game) in the cloud, VR is not an option.

You're not reading.
Are you really so dense that you can't even comprehend what I'm saying in plain English? I'll say it again: Persistent connections across multiple devices utilizes Microsoft Azure. The end. Stop trying to pretend you're so smart when you're making yourself look clueless.

As for VR, it has a ways to go before you can get latency under 20 ms using cloud processing. But nothing says it's physically impossible, it's just not there yet. The render pipeline can work under these conditions with a fast enough connection.

Exactly what the Kinect users said back than when everyone told them the limitations of the device and it would fade.
The Kinect is literally a camera sensing input device. VR and MR are computing platforms, which means they have a very large set of generalized uses. Communication is a big one. It progresses as follows: Phonecalls -> Texting / Messaging -> Video Chat. The next paradigm is VR and MR, which is just as important as the rest, perhaps more so. Other big uses are telepresence, screen simulation, spatial computing and work productivity, exercise, lifestyle, shopping, assistance, education, medical use, training, robotics manipulation, architecture design, product design, entertainment and media of all types, living new lives, and lots more.
 
Last edited:

DanielsM

Banned
Are you really so dense that you can't even comprehend what I'm saying in plain English? I'll say it again: Persistent connections across multiple devices utilizes Microsoft Azure. The end. Stop trying to pretend you're so smart when you're making yourself look clueless.

As for VR, it has a ways to go before you can get latency under 20 ms using cloud processing. But nothing says it's physically impossible, it's just not there yet. The render pipeline can work under these conditions with a fast enough connection.


The Kinect is literally a camera sensing input device. VR and MR are computing platforms, which means they have a very large set of generalized uses. Communication is a big one. It progresses as follows: Phonecalls -> Texting / Messaging -> Video Chat. The next paradigm is VR and MR, which is just as important as the rest, perhaps more so. Other big uses are telepresence, screen simulation, spatial computing and work productivity, exercise, lifestyle, shopping, assistance, education, medical use, training, robotics manipulation, architecture design, product design, entertainment and media of all types, living new lives, and lots more.

"Persistent connections", who said that wasn't possible, of course the device can have a connection to Azure SO FREAKING WHAT! Which is why Microsoft has a local device for $3,500 doing work. You need to read again. VR is a no go as far a cloud because of barfing - unless someone can fix Physics than that isn't going to change.

So, its a new paradigm but Sony and other companies have been doing VR for 20 years?

Another its the future, its great but nobody buys it guy. I run into quite a few of you guys, I mean at least the Kinect sold. Look I'm done with you if you can't show me these huge numbers, show or shutup.... they don't exist.

Usually I don't need someone to tell me everyone uses iPhones/Androids phones in mass because everywhere I go everyone has one. Don't tell me about a mass product, show me. Tell you what, you go to Facebook with some investors with $2b dollars I bet Zuck will have something to sell you within about 5 seconds.
 
Last edited:
"Persistent connections", who said that wasn't possible, of course the device can have a connection to Azure SO FREAKING WHAT! Which is why Microsoft has a local device for $3,500 doing work. You need to read again. VR is a no go as far a cloud because of barfing - unless someone can fix Physics than that isn't going to change.

So, its a new paradigm but Sony and other companies have been doing VR for 20 years?

Another its the future, its great but nobody buys it guy. I run into quite a few of you guys, I mean at least the Kinect sold. Look I'm done with you if you can't show me these huge numbers, show or shutup.... they don't exist.

Usually I don't need someone to tell me everyone uses iPhones/Androids phones in mass because everywhere I go everyone has one. Don't tell me about a mass product, show me. Tell you what, you go to Facebook with some investors with $2b dollars I bet Zuck will have something to sell you within about 5 seconds.
You keep telling me to read, and yet every time I respond correctly. No, there are no known physical limitations to say it can't be done. Again, it's a matter of connection speed. As long as we can get 20 ms or lower latency running off the cloud, it is not going to cause sickness in relation to the cloud.

Hardly anyone has been doing socialization in VR in the past 20 years. Even in today's headsets it's not nearly there for the mass-consumer, but the progress is staggering and so it might not be that long before it starts to get mass-market ready in that regard: https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-oculus-codec-avatars-vr/

"Sheikh's avatar doesn't have the beard or owlishly round glasses he wears in real life (ostensibly they're harder to get right, so he did the capture without them), but it's him. It's him so much that when he invites me to lean in and take a closer look at the stubble on his face, it feels incredibly invasive to do so. It's so much Steve Lombardi that, when he later walks into the room for real, I feel like I already know him—despite never having met him in the flesh. "

The Kinect sold because it was a) much cheaper and b) didn't need to establish a whole medium that no one knew what to expect from.

How can I show you that VR is a mass market in numbers? Stop trying to move goalposts. I'm saying there's little doubt it won't be mass market in the future based on the applications it has in store. The applications? I can show you those. I just showed you one with that link. If you don't think that (after it scales to a full body) has mass-market applications that many of us around the world can make use of, then you are hopeless.
 
Last edited:

DanielsM

Banned
You keep telling me to read, and yet every time I respond correctly. No, there are no known physical limitations to say it can't be done. Again, it's a matter of connection speed. As long as we can get 20 ms or lower latency running off the cloud, it is not going to cause sickness in relation to the cloud.

Hardly anyone has been doing socialization in VR in the past 20 years. Even in today's headsets it's not nearly there for the mass-consumer, but the progress is staggering and so it might not be that long before it starts to get mass-market ready in that regard: https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-oculus-codec-avatars-vr/

"Sheikh's avatar doesn't have the beard or owlishly round glasses he wears in real life (ostensibly they're harder to get right, so he did the capture without them), but it's him. It's him so much that when he invites me to lean in and take a closer look at the stubble on his face, it feels incredibly invasive to do so. It's so much Steve Lombardi that, when he later walks into the room for real, I feel like I already know him—despite never having met him in the flesh. "

The Kinect sold because it was a) much cheaper and b) didn't need to establish a whole medium that no one knew what to expect from.

How can I show you that VR is a mass market in numbers? Stop trying to move goalposts. I'm saying there's little doubt it won't be mass market in the future based on the applications it has in store. The applications? I can show you those. I just showed you one with that link. If you don't think that (after it scales to a full body) has mass-market applications that many of us around the world can make use of, then you are hopeless.

I'm done with you I gave you a chance to reread and you haven't, you're fighting with yourself.

You are like the silly cloud gaming guys, its so great but none of them have a subscription to a service, its the future but they don't even buy it. LOL

You keep telling me to read, and yet every time I respond correctly. No, there are no known physical limitations to say it can't be done. Again, it's a matter of connection speed. As long as we can get 20 ms or lower latency running off the cloud, it is not going to cause sickness in relation to the cloud.

Yes you do have limitation i.e. the Speed of Light, let's put this way, the games on PSVR have to run at 60fps so that people don't barf, this is the bare minimum and really isn't good enough i.e. sickness and barfcity. It actually has to be much higher, you need probably less then 10ms. They current hardware isn't fast enough let alone adding another 20-30ms, its barf city.

I'm going to put you on ignore because we're not getting anywhere with this, I wish you the best of luck. Its a mass appealing device but nobody is buying stance. More people cared about 3d TVs and by far more about the Kinect, nobody cares now.
 
I'm done with you I gave you a chance to reread and you haven't, you're fighting with yourself.

You are like the silly cloud gaming guys, its so great but none of them have a subscription to a service, its the future but they don't even buy it. LOL



Yes you do have limitation i.e. the Speed of Light, let's put this way, the games on PSVR have to run at 60fps so that people don't barf, this is the bare minimum and really isn't good enough i.e. sickness and barfcity. It actually has to be much higher, you need probably less then 10ms. They current hardware isn't fast enough let alone adding another 20-30ms, its barf city.

I'm going to put you on ignore because we're not getting anywhere with this, I wish you the best of luck. Its a mass appealing device but nobody is buying stance. More people cared about 3d TVs and by far more about the Kinect, nobody cares now.
There is something seriously wrong you with if you think I can't read,your posts, despite everyone here clearly being able to see my responses, in which they clearly show I directly respond in a way one would expect.

Under 20ms is fine for just about everyone. Less is always better, and getting under 10ms is totally possible. If you read this, you might actually see the process of how it works: https://medium.com/@DAQRI/motion-to-photon-latency-in-mobile-ar-and-vr-99f82c480926

As for more people caring about 3D TVs, it's almost as if it's easier to market a small 'upgrade' to their TV viewing experience than it is to market something that almost no one understands the concept of yet?
It's almost as if it takes many years for a medium to grow. Gee, I sure remember the days where the first generation of smartphones and PCs, and heck even TVs sold millions upon millions. That totally happened right out of the gate, right?

Sure, I might be on ignore now, but I'd like people to see some actual valid responses to the ramblings you spout on about.
 
Last edited:

mckmas8808

Banned
Yeah i agree, and things are allowed to change.... Them announcing it at e3 doesnt set everything in stone forever. Ill never understand people that just dont understand that ideas and products can change and evolve.

I guess my point on this is MS actually "is" investing into VR. They just haven't managed to make a consumer product yet that they can sell. But there's no reason for us on GAF to act as if the R&D money on VR or MR isn't adding up for MS.
 
VR is a fad that has overstayed its welcome.

Microsoft made the right move.
Hilarity ensues. Anyone who thinks VR, the ability to step inside virtual worlds, is a fad has... how to phrase this... has a peabrain.

I'm sorry that you're unable to comprehend the many benefits it brings to gaming and to life in general. Get better soon, Zelent.

Remember the 3DTV fad? The one that declined in 2-3 years? Weird how VR is 4 years in and only growing with basically every area improving. It's almost as if it's not a fad.
 

Moses85

Member
Nobody wants to set shit up when they play a game.

Get home, pick up controller, sit on couch. Relax and play a game. That's what most people want.

It’s all about giving your customers „choices“

Sales of PSVR speaking for itself.
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Nobody wants to set shit up when they play a game.

Get home, pick up controller, sit on couch. Relax and play a game. That's what most people want.
Er, that's how (PC, dunno PS) VR works, you only set things up the very first time and if you move house/playroom, like when you buy then connect your console and its cables, TV, set and connect your wi fi, pair controllers, configure settings etc., you don't do that every game, lol. Try it some day.
Al3x1s said:
Here are some random videos showing off VR gameplay/possibilities.


I don't get why it's so hard for the haters to get it. It's not kinect or Wiimote. It's kinda like the difference between pointing and clicking to shoot, vs playing a good old lightgun game like Ghost Squad ort Virtua Cop (with an actual pinpoint accurate lightgun, not HD-era console ports with the flawed Wiimote/PSMove tech). Except the gun game in VR presents a far larger difference as the setting envelops you rather than remain flat on a screen and can be intuitively free roaming like any PC FPS with that added immersion and the new player skill factor that is completely different to pointing and clicking, plus any gun can have realistic reloading methods as you manually switch magazines, pull the bolts, whatever, any gadget realistic uses with pulling the pin off a grenade with your own two hands, using a tablet with various functions, your radio and so on (or it can also be simplified as in more arcadey games where you can reload by lowering your weapons).

Did you never have fun in such games or at least understand how they're different to controlling crosshair with a mouse or analog stick and can provide a new, fun experience that challenges and hones different skills to thumb twiddling as it mimics real life aiming to a degree? That obviously translates to every physical action in VR, not just guns, as the controllers aren't lightguns but rather versatile devices that incorporate all traditional controls on top of the tracking allowing you to do all sorts of things, from throwing something, to using melee weapons, to just interacting with the environment realistically, with something as simple as a pressure switch or more intricate machinery with all kinds of controls, like an actual bomber cockpit and all its gear without having to have a bulky 1:1 Thrustmaster Warthog recreation just for that (and then a recreation for every other plane type you fly, when you can just have it all in VR fully interactive).

So, you can push a button and watch your Dante do a cool combo and have fun and with VR you can also actually wield the weapons yourself and feel like you're hot shit rather than watch someone being hot shit or only being hot shit in your thumbs. It's not that hard to get even if you haven't experienced it, any hater is simply unwilling to. Or trolling. Mostly that I guess, if one doesn't care about something the logical thing is to move on rather than misrepresent it with ignorance about what it offers yet still get in arguments with people who know all that first hand trying to force them to submit to an uninformed opinion or pretend they're somehow shills whether for personal or corporate reasons.
More trolls incoming vvv I had it and hate it so you must listen to me, I'm objective, everything about it sucks, all the games suck, it's not worth it, trust me, why would I lie to you, everyone having tons of fun is just trying to justify his purchase, I'm rich and bought everything so tell it how it is, lmfao.
 
Last edited:

rofif

Can’t Git Gud
Vr is amazing... I've had dk1, dk2, cv1 and rift S. Played with each one for 2 weeks to a month. Was amazed, hot, sweaty and sold it each time.
It is amazing experience but the image quality with sweaty head and low fov is always an issue.... and the games just suck.
I have no interest in vr. Maybe I will get Oculus Quest and play half life 3 on it when it comes out but not spending grand on index. it's madness.

It's just the same with headphones. If I have to connect the cable to dac, I will use those headphones less than wireless gaming headset
 
Last edited:

Birdo

Banned
Er, that's how (PC, dunno PS) VR works, you only set things up the very first time and if you move house/playroom

Oh cool. I'll constantly have a giant VR mat in the middle of my living room and a bunch of cables everywhere even when I'm not using it :messenger_bicep:
 
Unless the next Xbox can fully support high res VR I'd rather they wait. Like mentioned earlier in this thread, pick an existing VR headset(s?) to support and allow third parties to develop if they so choose.
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Oh cool. I'll constantly have a giant VR mat in the middle of my living room and a bunch of cables everywhere even when I'm not using it :messenger_bicep:
I dunno if this will become a product friend, it's just a patent, I just told you how it is in current VR products which don't have mats since you said "another" implying you think that's how it is for all VR. Why cut the quote short?
 
Last edited:
Oh cool. I'll constantly have a giant VR mat in the middle of my living room and a bunch of cables everywhere even when I'm not using it :messenger_bicep:
The mat is Microsoft's thing, not anyone elses, and it's a patent that would probably never appear in a consumer product because computer vision from cameras mounted on the headset can perform the same functionality with further refinement.

Plus there are now wireless solutions for PC and standalone headsets like Oculus Quest.
 

Wonko_C

Member
Maybe not a cup of everyone's tea but VR with Kinect so it can fully track your body would be awesome: It would get rid of the floating hands syndrome that plagues current VR games, and you would be exponentially more expressive in games and social apps.
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
The mat is Microsoft's thing, not anyone elses, and it's a patent that would probably never appear in a consumer product because computer vision from cameras mounted on the headset can perform the same functionality with further refinement.
I could see a mat having use to add more body awareness to VR. If it's not just visual and can actually detect your feet that would surely help with your avatar's posture and such in ways hand and head tracking can be off. Plus it could be part of input options for more controls. Pressure/lean in a direction to move, walk/jog in place maybe for some active game, doing accurate leaning rather than stepping to the side beyond abstract points, jump to jump, etc. But yeah it can't be fragile or expensive so not too nuanced and it's not something you can easily sell for sure.

Maybe not a cup of everyone's tea but VR with Kinect so it can fully track your body would be awesome: It would get rid of the floating hands syndrome that plagues current VR games, and you would be exponentially more expressive in games and social apps.
Floating hands tend to be just for first person view these days (and often optional), so that weird inverse kinematics don't, well, weird you out. Other people see a full body with those inverse kinematics but it's not always (often?) accurate outside the hand /head positions etc.

Some games like - barely a game - Arkham VR and to a lesser extent Lone Echo and other Echo games have really god inverse kinematics for the upper body/arms but you can always fool them. Others not so much but I usually prefer seeing arms as long as the hands are accurately drawn.
 
Last edited:

Vawn

Banned
In any VR thread it becomes immediately apparent who has and who has not played Astrobot.

Someone playing Astrobot and then saying "VR is just a fad or gimmick" is like someone back in the day playing Mario 64 and saying "meh, 3D video games will never work".
 
Last edited:

Wonko_C

Member
I could see a mat having use to add more body awareness to VR. If it's not just visual and can actually detect your feet that would surely help with your avatar's posture and such in ways hand and head tracking can be off. But yeah it's not something you can easily sell.


Floating hands tend to be just for first person view these days (and often optional), so that weird inverse kinematics don't, well, weird you out. Other people see a full body with those inverse kinematics but it's not always (often?) accurate outside the hand /head positions etc.

Some games like - barely a game - Arkham VR and to a lesser extent Lone Echo and other Echo games have really god inverse kinematics for the upper body/arms but you can always fool them. Others not so much but I usually prefer seeing arms as long as the hands are accurately drawn.

I don't really mind floating hands but I know for a lot of people it's an immersion breaker. The most recent example I've played is No Man's Sky and they don't distract me at all, to me it feels like I'm wearing gloves, I guess my mind fills in the blanks.

Far Point renders the full body and it looks good, likely because you have both arms holding an assault rifle so your movmement is limited. I also played a demo of Ancient Amuletor, picked up the elf and I could see my own virtual boobs... That was weird, LOL.
 
Last edited:

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
In any VR thread it becomes immediately apparent who has and who has not played Astrobot.

Someone playing Astrobot and then saying "VR is just a fad or gimmick" is like someone back in the day playing Mario 64 and saying "meh, 3D video games will never work".
Also who has or hasn't played the best of PC VR (or even some multi platform stuff showcasing the difference in capabilities) :messenger_winking_tongue:
 
Last edited:

xrnzaaas

Gold Member
Patents rarely become products. It's likely something they are testing as a substitute for computer vision not being good enough just yet.
I know, I just hope that VR will go in a direction of offering better precision and comfort, not attacking you with more gimmicks like moving on a mat (and inevitably colliding with things in the room).
 
I don't really mind floating hands but I know for a lot of people it's an immersion breaker. The most recent example I've played is No Man's Sky and they don't distract me at all, to me it feels like I'm wearing gloves, I guess my mind fills in the blanks.

Far Point renders the full body and it looks good, maybe because you have both arms holding an assault rifle, I also played a demo of a tower defense game, picked up the elf and I could see my own virtual boobs, that was weird, LOL.
Floating hands are fine for me, but I always get more immersed with a well done full body, significantly more so. It ends up as one of those things that you really notice when you have it. For social VR though, I really dislike floating hands as I want to be as expressive as possible.

Full body IK is becoming more important though now that games like Blade and Sorcery and Boneworks are using physical models on the limbs which affects gameplay.
 
I know, I just hope that VR will go in a direction of offering better precision and comfort, not attacking you with more gimmicks like moving on a mat (and inevitably colliding with things in the room).
Of course it will. These are prototype headsets from Oculus. Much smaller and comfortable for the eyes.

oculus-rift-prototype-half-dome-2-3.jpg
 

Flintty

Member
Having something like compatibility with the Rift wouldn’t be a bad thing. It’s just another option with nothing to lose.

Take NMS for example. If I was buying that for the first time today I would buy on PC for the VR. If the X had VR I’d buy it for the X instead.

Likewise any game that supports VR. It’s a no brainer.

I have both anyway because I got it for the X before VR but that’s beside the point.
 
This launches in December:
Yeah you can certainly get slim form factors even now, but there are large tradeoffs there. The headsets in the Oculus image would be more advanced than anything on the market including Valve Index, and smaller at the same time. That's where the real hard challenges are in R&D.
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
In don't think Microsoft has the studio talent to make enough compelling regular games, much less VR. I do wish they would allow compatiability options with current pcvr headsets. The time is now for this tech. The improvements in the last few years have been great.
 
In don't think Microsoft has the studio talent to make enough compelling regular games, much less VR. I do wish they would allow compatiability options with current pcvr headsets. The time is now for this tech. The improvements in the last few years have been great.
Ninja Theory though. I do want some Ninja Theory VR games. Hellblade was incredible in VR and it seems like they want to pitch themselves as a VR centric studio at some point when the market can support it.
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
Ninja Theory though. I do want some Ninja Theory VR games. Hellblade was incredible in VR and it seems like they want to pitch themselves as a VR centric studio at some point when the market can support it.

Yeah any VR is better than none. I'll take it, but I doubt I'll even support xbox next gen, especially without VR.
 
Top Bottom