It doesn't need to have a persistent wow factor, if the games have great gameplay to back it up.
Unfortunately that isn't the case for most of the VR software, and the gimmick wears off quickly.
I get that, but there are a lot of shallow non-VR games too, including ones with objectively broken game mechanics. So is this more a case where VR needs to have a higher ratio of games with solid gameplay since it's the one people are less familiar with?
Because I can understand that thought, even if I think most of the biggest VR games are already getting the gameplay to back them up by virtue of them also being big AAA traditional/non-VR games that just happen to get VR support added to them.
They don't need to produce a headset, they can and should license one for xbox (or even better add support for most existing headsets) and make VR games for PC/xbox.
Pretty sure flight sim is VR compatible, do the same for the forza series and some of bethesdas RPGs then call it a day. Can even add a VR tier to gamepass and have it be cross save save and seamless between xbox and PC like the rest.
No need for XBVR, just let people use their quests and their indexes as a means of gauging interest.
This is the best approach for them in the near term, I agree. Whitelist Quest 2, whitelist Index etc. and make them compatible. 3P devs will provide the VR content, maybe even a few 1P studios will want to provide it as well.
Best news is that it will encourage creation of more VR content, which helps the tech and the medium, and is a win for gamers.
Not even the 10th day of the year, but probably the most entitled topic we will get in 2022.
For once, Ms is not pursuing trends for the sake of it. I like VR, but I like even more when every company does something different.
Besides, in a time they can't even supply enough consoles, why would they split their hardware production even more?
That's why I'm also saying they don't need to produce a 1P headset of their own. If they just whitelist support for a couple of existing 3P ones, so that they can be used on Xbox consoles, that would already be a big step towards support with very little risk in costs or resources for Microsoft.
If cloud streaming is the end goal to reach 1 billion Indians etc. it is incompatible with VR low latency requirement. That’s the conflict.
Vr forever tethers you to local compute.
Hmm, I dunno. Streaming tech is constantly improving, and latency is getting lower. A lot of latency issues are on the ISP provider, too. For example Starlink generally has latency of 20 - 30 ms, meanwhile Hughsnet has latency of over 700 ms. These are for wireless, satellite-based internet service btw. Regardless if the streaming latency on xCloud, Stadia etc. end is great, any user stuck with the latter ISP is going to have an unplayable experience.
If VR is going to be longer-term tethered to local compute, I feel that's going to be more an issue with too many people being stuck with mediocre ISPs, and possibly too much in overhead from Wifi specifications making that so. But if the streaming tech can improve to a reasonable level, and internet infrastructure improves for the majority, then you can get good enough VR headsets in the future that are cheap to manufacture, and maybe companies pair them with their own wireless module routers built with low-latency wireless communication in mind suitable for gaming, including VR gaming.
That's one way things can look 10, 15 years from now potentially.