Support NeoGAF

[Ellery]

Well I can only speak for me personally, but I think it is definitely a good idea to not focus on VR in its current state. I am a no VR gamer and I don't plan to in the next 10 years. I just love the way Video Games are now and have been ever since I first played on the Nintendo Entertainment System or on my dads Commodore 64. I am not a contrarian to change, but I don't even like wearing headphones/headsets or watches so VR goggles is not something I see myself wearing, especially for longer periods of time. My dream is just great AAA gaming with a controller (or Mouse and Keyboard) on a TV/Monitor with beautiful graphics that are accompanied by a lovely crafted environmental world to immerse me into it like Red Dead Redemption 2 and the Last of Us do.

But who knows what the future brings. Maybe in 15 years VR headsets are so small and hardware so performant that it becomes a better and less invasive experience. On top of that I feel like developers are already "taxed" enough as it is with game development. It is taking longer and longer and I wouldn't know where they could implement the additional layer of features and opportunities that VR brings with it. While it may be cool and shiny I don't want developers to sacrifice on other areas in a game just to make it VR or design a game purely for VR. It sometimes can work like RE7 and I definitely don't mind games that are created for VR, but it is definitely not for me.

And those are probably the reasons why Microsoft could be ditching it, not necessarily my reasons, but I guess many people have small little problems with VR and the total number of VR headsets out there is pretty small. I guess they want to focus on gaming subscriptions and entering the mobile market of 2 billion people instead of putting resources into a "niche" market that VR is.

 

[iconmaster]

Market-wise, VR is still kind of a non-factor. Yeah, PSVR seems to be doing alright for Sony. But Microsoft isn't exactly making a mistake here.

 

[DarthBuzzer]

Actually it's pretty awesome. It's always better to have options.

Apparently not for this guy. Even for Nintendo, he said he didn't want 'that garbage' to hit the platform.

 

[Gavon West]

Fuck VR. It's not ready yet. Glad they are sticking to gaming nuts and bolts.

 

[ConnorDuffy1977]

Fuck VR. It's not ready yet. Glad they are sticking to gaming nuts and bolts.

The VR games I have played are definitely ready on PSVR. And the 'nuts and bolts gaming' is also great on the PS4. I guess I'm just a fan of video games overall and it's nice to experience both. I'm a very open-minded person, however.

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

Actually it's pretty awesome. It's always better to have options.

Key word, option

I say focus on raw power and games, supplement VR later

 

[ConnorDuffy1977]

I say focus on raw power and games, supplement VR later

You can do both. Sony has proven this. Why limit your options? Doesn't make any sense.

 

[mckmas8808]

Fuck VR. It's not ready yet. Glad they are sticking to gaming nuts and bolts.

I have a VR headset and it's pretty ready for me.

 

[Iced Arcade]

I'd say smart move as i don't have any interest or think it's ever going to take off. BUT the PSVR being a thing doesn't affect my PS4 so.

 

[Gavon West]

I have a VR headset and it's pretty ready for me.

1 down. 20 million to go.

 

[Gavon West]

The VR games I have played are definitely ready on PSVR. And the 'nuts and bolts gaming' is also great on the PS4. I guess I'm just a fan of video games overall and it's nice to experience both. I'm a very open-minded person, however.

We all are fans of video games. Thats why we're here. Doesnt mean we drop down a peg if we dont support a platform. To me VR is too cumbersome and not quite ready for prime time just yet. When the tech becomes a bit more mainstream, then I think that'll be a good time for companies like Microsoft to dive in. Right now, its just not there.

 

[ConnorDuffy1977]

To me VR is too cumbersome and not quite ready for prime time just yet. When the tech becomes a bit more mainstream, then I think that'll be a good time for companies like Microsoft to dive in. Right now, its just not there.

It's always better to have the option. If not for you, then for other gamers. Stop being the old guy yelling at kids to get off your lawn.

 

[mckmas8808]

We all are fans of video games. Thats why we're here. Doesnt mean we drop down a peg if we dont support a platform. To me VR is too cumbersome and not quite ready for prime time just yet. When the tech becomes a bit more mainstream, then I think that'll be a good time for companies like Microsoft to dive in. Right now, its just not there.

Except VR needs companies like MS to dive in now to help make it mainstream.

 

[Gavon West]

It's always better to have the option. If not for you, then for other gamers. Stop being the old guy yelling at kids to get off your lawn.

Stop being a drama queen. I never said anything of the kind. If someone enjoys VR, that's great! But the physical aesthetics and cumbersome tech inside VR currently isnt something that many gamers seem to be too interested in at the moment.

It's a niche product. I personally think a big problem with VR is how it completely blocks out reality around you. That's really uncomfortable for gamers and those around them. It also needs to be more"unplugged" smaller and aesthetically "cooler" . 3D at home is kind of awkward as it is. Works great in theaters, but in the home is another matter entirely. VR - even moreso. That's me, Oprah.

 

[Alexios]

Stop being a drama queen. I never said anything of the kind. If someone enjoys VR, that's great! But the physical aesthetics and cumbersome tech inside VR currently isnt something that many gamers seem to be too interested in at the moment.

It's a niche product. I personally think a big problem with VR is how it completely blocks out reality around you. That's really uncomfortable for gamers and those around them. It also needs to be more"unplugged" smaller and aesthetically "cooler" . 3D at home is kind of awkward as it is. Works great in theaters, but in the home is another matter entirely. VR - even moreso. That's me, Oprah.

Physical aesthetics? You think you look cool sitting on a couch or desk chair or whatever and playing out of VR or something?

Saying it's a niche product is different to saying it's not successful. Tons of niche products keep continuing development and progress while making profit. Some later become mainstream, like vidya gaemz (or specific series within vidya gaemz, how bout that Monster Hunter on PS2 vs now?).

So, niche doesn't mean unsuccessful and success with something you deem niche as in Sony's PSVR case is certainly better than failure at something more mainstream like, I dunno, Microsoft phones or something, lol.

And then pretending people who have properly experienced/bought into VR and point out some of the bs surrounding its viability or available software in the home, on mobile or in location based attractions or whatever else don't count because it's "1 down, 20 million to go" lol.

 

[Gavon West]

Physical aesthetics? You think you look cool sitting on a couch playing out of VR or something?

Seriously?????

Visually, a VR device isnt very pleasing or looks "friendly". I dont care where it is. In fact (not even talking about the tech itself) its kind of intimidating to look at if you arent a gamer.

If you speak to most people who arent gamers, the number one reason (in my experience) in why they dont game is because the controller intimidates them. Too many buttons. I've even heard of the vibration being a HUGE turn off when it comes to console gaming.

Granted, alot of people have accepted the controller but it's taken some time. Its going to take time for people to accept VR too. Probably more.

for the overly sensitive: I'm not saying VR isnt going to find its groove. I have no doubt it will........eventually.

 

[Alexios]

Never seen anyone get scared of VR sets but ok, I can't argue with that kind of point which doesn't quite rely on tangible things.

Anyway, we're all gamers here, to some extent at least.

Do we have to approve of COD, MOBA, AAA and ridicule people excited about niche titles like Shadow of the Colossus or Bayonetta or the next great eurojank RPG or the next indie favorite and now VR telling them their toys suck/shouldn't be made/supported cos they don't sell as much? Lol.

Besides, Sony, HTC, Oculus/Facebook and plenty other companies involved in different fields find success with something niche like VR and Microsoft fails with something mainstream like smartphones so it's not like you can say meh, companies should only focus on what's already mainstream.

Video games would have died in that case.

Some of my favorite PC games are from the 90s, long before they were quite as popular as now, some favorites were niche even then, why would I dismiss years of fun and entertainment by just conceding, yeah, PC gaming ain't where it should be for true greatness, I''d wait for the 2010's!

 

[Gavon West]

Never seen anyone get scared of VR sets but ok, I can't argue with that kind of point which doesn't quite rely on tangible things.

Anyway, we're all gamers here, to some extent at least.

Do we have to approve of COD, MOBA, AAA and ridicule people excited about niche titles like Shadow of the Colossus or Bayonetta or the next great eurojank RPG or the next indie favorite and now VR telling them their toys suck/shouldn't be made/supported cos they don't sell as much? Lol.

Besides, Sony, HTC, Oculus/Facebook and plenty other companies involved in different fields find success with something niche like VR and Microsoft fails with something mainstream like smartphones so it's not like you can say meh, companies should only focus on what's already mainstream.

Video games would have died in that case.

Some of my favorite PC games are from the 90s, long before they were quite as popular as now, some favorites were niche even then, why would I dismiss years of fun and entertainment by just conceding, yeah, PC gaming ain't where it should be for true greatness, I''d wait for the 2010's!

WTF??

You sound like you took my opinion on VR personally. Thats....deep, breh.

But, okay?

 

[ConnorDuffy1977]

Stop being a drama queen.

Seems like you're getting pretty emotional about this. I am enjoying 'nuts and bolts' gaming along with VR. It's cool to do new stuff. Don't be scared, homie.

 

[shark sandwich]

Isn't that kinda of a contradiction?
If MS doesn't adopt VR for next Xbox and Sony is the only one pushing it, then 3rd parties will still be reluctant to jump on it, making it harder for it to become mainstream, since PCVR has a much higher cost.
If MS adopted VR for Xbox then 3rd parties would make more games for it and Sony + MS install base would easily make it mainstream and evolve faster.

Or it could end up like stereoscopic 3D. Where every TV manufacturer jumped on the bandwagon but consumers lost interest as soon the novelty wore off.

 

[mckmas8808]

Or it could end up like stereoscopic 3D. Where every TV manufacturer jumped on the bandwagon but consumers lost interest as soon the novelty wore off.

So far VR has added more to gaming than 3D has to movies or games in the home.

 

[ConnorDuffy1977]

So far VR has added more to gaming than 3D has to movies or games in the home.

I agree with you. But I will also say that 3D TV's and blurays sold pretty well and quite frankly, I enjoyed those too.

 

[DarthBuzzer]

Or it could end up like stereoscopic 3D. Where every TV manufacturer jumped on the bandwagon but consumers lost interest as soon the novelty wore off.

3D TVs never had any real use. They are updated models of TVs. VR is a full medium of it's own with plenty of real use for consumers and businesses.

 

[mckmas8808]

3D TVs never had any real use. They are updated models of TVs. VR is a full medium of it's own with plenty of real use for consumers and businesses.

Plus 3D content just wasn't there to make it useful either.

 

[Alexios]

WTF??

You sound like you took my opinion on VR personally. Thats....deep, breh.

But, okay?

Yeah in a gaming discussion forum people should just be condescending about the "other side's" supposed feelings and go all, breh, brah, bruuuuuuh, to show maturity and that they don't take unimportant things personally/seriously whenever there are counter points to their statements.

Then they can just circle jerk the same shit all over again because hey, anyone who has shown a different side is just taking things too personally. Or something.

Right. I learnt a valuable lesson in how to ad hominem, thank you for your time.

 

[Gavon West]

Seems like you're getting pretty emotional about this. I am enjoying 'nuts and bolts' gaming along with VR. It's cool to do new stuff. Don't be scared, homie.

Not at all, actually. Funny how when someone has an opposing opinion, people think you're being aggressive. Lol.

We arent "homies".

Glad you're enjoying VR and gaming. Still though.....looks like more gamers agree with me than with your opinion seeing as VR hasnt really taken off and probably wont for a while. I'd bet the farm, game streaming takes off sooner.

 

[mckmas8808]

Not at all, actually. Funny how when someone has an opposing opinion, people think you're being aggressive. Lol.

We arent "homies".

Glad you're enjoying VR and gaming. Still though.....looks like more gamers agree with me than with your opinion seeing as VR hasnt really taken off and probably wont for a while. I'd bet the farm, game streaming takes off sooner.

Does it matter which take off faster though? Why either/or?

 

[Justin9mm]

I think it's highly risky for Microsoft to dabble in now as it is still very new and the tech is not there yet, focusing on system selling games is what they need to future proof the console. Later on once VR is more mainstream with a solid consumer base, maybe then they can release something to compete with Sony. Going into VR for the sake of it now is a death sentence, especially if they still don't have a good exclusive library. Let's also not have a repeat of the Kinect!

 

[Gavon West]

Yeah in a gaming discussion forum people should just be condescending about the "other side's" supposed feelings and go all, breh, brah, bruuuuuuh, to show maturity and that they don't take unimportant things personally/seriously whenever there are counter points to their statements.

Right. I learnt a valuable lesson in how to ad hominem, thank you for your time.

No one was being condescending. (your post did seem as if you were offended.) I just dont think VR has a big enough market to tap into the mainstream the way traditional gaming has. And until it does, why invest heavily into it? It doesnt make sense.

 

[DarthBuzzer]

Not at all, actually. Funny how when someone has an opposing opinion, people think you're being aggressive. Lol.

We arent "homies".

Glad you're enjoying VR and gaming. Still though.....looks like more gamers agree with me than with your opinion seeing as VR hasnt really taken off and probably wont for a while. I'd bet the farm, game streaming takes off sooner.

To be fair, most people who have used VR enjoy it. The problem is that few gamers have even tried a headset so far. I agree on your point that it isn't mass-consumer ready though.

 

[mckmas8808]

No one was being condescending. (your post did seem as if you were offended.) I just dont think VR has a big enough market to tap into the mainstream the way traditional gaming has. And until it does, why invest heavily into it? It doesnt make sense.

Do you think it makes sense for Sony to have created PSVR?

 

[Gavon West]

Does it matter which take off faster though? Why either/or?

It really doesnt matter. You're right. VR just doesnt have the same ring to it, I suppose.

 

[Vawn]

Does it matter which take off faster though? Why either/or?

Look who you're talking to. Which is Xbox likely to do?

 

[Gavon West]

Do you think it makes sense for Sony to have created PSVR?

Short-term, yes. Long-term? No. I think eventually it wont be worth the investment if something in the VR realm doesnt take off in a big way.

Akin to how Sony had numerous AAA hits in a row. It really helped to solidify the PS4 as a huge success that will probably extend into next gen. In my opinion, VR needs the same thing. Hit, after hit, after hit. Disconnect the chord, give it a new front design (or something that doesnt look so cumbersome) and give the visuals, console quality performance and equal visual flare. This is just my personal opinion. This is what I see when I look at VR.

 

[Alexios]

Look who you're talking to. Which is Xbox likely to do?

I just find it funny when we're 4 pages in a thread where people discuss if Microsoft is right or wrong in not being interested in VR when they very much are interested and are one of the larger companies tapping and investing into and developing it. Currently in the enthusiast consumer PCVR space there's basically HTC, Facebook and Microsoft (with partners) with a few companies like Pimax, Natal and other similar brands focused on different aspects like having the most high resolution or fov enterprise VR or location based experiences like The Void. Plus all the companies jumping on the bandwagon with lackluster mobile VR (I really think Facebook shouldn't have jumped on that themselves with the Oculus Go, at least wait a couple years until they could offer something with full 6dof like the Quest for a lower price point, VR with just rotating isn't a good look). At least until we see what Valve is doing in tangible consumer form. Both HTC and Facebook which are perhaps the most known for PCVR are even following Microsoft's lead in providing easier to set up inside-out tracking based products, Vive with Cosmos for PCVR and Facebook with the stand alone Oculus Quest and by leaks and reports likely their next "Oculus Rift S" side-grade product (side-grade because inside out tracking does have problems compared to external sensors, but it also has benefits and we've yet to sample how they attempt to improve it compared to the first generation of Microsoft's WMR projects). So, Microsoft is very much active in VR and helps shape its future and, indeed, helps in making it more mainstream compatible, but we're all discussing if we agree or disagree with their lack of interest in VR just because they've not yet confirmed it as a thing for the next Xbox, for which we know next to nothing, lol. And yeah, it's pretty obvious someone here would be all in with VR if only they had announced Xbox compatibility with a couple big first party games on top, even if they wouldn't become their biggest hits in millions sold. Granted, with Microsoft there's always the danger they will just drop the whole initiative instead of continue to iterate and improve on it even if other companies prove it's a viable profitable growing business but there's no sign of that yet despite two clickbaity sensational threads posted on here (this being one too).

 

[Ten_Fold]

Seems Microsoft is really trying to put effort on bringing the games, the start of next gen is gonna be interesting.

 

[Justin9mm]

Do you think it makes sense for Sony to have created PSVR?

The difference is that Sony had no competition when it came to the console consumer market. As Microsoft will be competing against PSVR, it's more risky and therefore he is right that it does not make sense at this time.

 

[Alexios]

So with that logic it was a bad move for Microsoft to enter the console market with Sony's established dominance in the Xbox days, as if that's not what led to their later success in the field even if some consider the original to not have done amazingly?

 

[Mattyp]

So with that logic it was a bad move for Microsoft to enter the console market with Sony's established dominance in the Xbox days, as if that's not what led to their later success in the field even if some consider the original to not have done amazingly?

Every Sony has sold wonderfully, every single console out there pretty much has sold wonderfully. It was a much more known market.

VR has been around for quite awhile now, and still sells like shit. And is a much bigger gamble even if a less expensive one, in time and resources at the moment.

Glad they're not chasing the VR route but to each their own I personally have no time for it. I see them just enabling third party headsets if enough people ever do want to use them.

 

[Alexios]

Every Sony has sold wonderfully, every single console out there pretty much has sold wonderfully.

What? You don't know how many failed products from other companies (or even established companies like Nintendo) there had been? Not every console has been a success, lol.

I mean you could have even made the argument that Microsoft entered around when SEGA exited the market which could have made them think they have more chances (then again they'd have to have been working on it before) but you went the complete opposite way...

 

[Winter John]

After the last launch disaster I think it's a very good thing that MS are going to avoid gimmicks and concentrate on delivering a basic, powerful console. That's all most gamers want. A good console with a good software library.

 

[Mattyp]

What? You don't know how many failed products from other companies (or even Nintendo) there have been? Not every console has been a success, lol.

What failed products? When did I bring up anything about failed products? We're talking consoles being a much more known market to enter and what major console release has never been a success? Just because one sells millions more than the other doesn't make one not successful, it still means 10s of millions of units. A number any manufacturer would kill to reproduce in any market. You could argue the Saturn, but that already had slight cancer from what came before it and SEGAs ability to add a million attachments to a console prior killing its own image. And what I put as the beginning of the downfall of SEGA for those of us that lived through it. Consoles where a much more known item to Microsoft and that was the point of discussion.

If we're talking about failed products yes there's tonnes of them, from every manufacturer. And what do all these products mostly have in common? Their all additions to the main machine, all of them come and go over every console generation. Will VR head the same way as everything else has over the past 10 years? No, I do see more of a market for it in arcades and niche gamers. Does that mean Microsoft should invest billions into a product they see little return on just because its going to hang around for longer? No. They'll let the market mature another 5 years or even more, and I honestly see them just allowing anyone's headsets access to the xbox so there's no need to fret just yet. And all those VR games on PC? You can play them on your xbox. This will be their goal when they see it worthwhile to them, at the moment its games for gamers when next gen launches and VR is no where near that goal.

 

[Alexios]

That was my point, you said every console ever has sold great which is factually wrong. And no, not only add-ons have failed. Microsoft wasn't the first company trying to enter the market because they saw money in it. Tons of others, you may not have even heard of because they flopped, did.

You can't say Microsoft got in the market because it basically guaranteed a return because every console sold great when that's false, especially when they didn't even get a return for years with the division leaking money. But they kept at it and reached their current good state.

It also isn't the first time Microsoft (or any other company) is interested in getting in a new and growing market early, some times you can enter a red ocean and other times a blue ocean, they do what seems to work best per case, not the same strategy everywhere.

Also, they are in fact interested in VR contrary to the thread and poll. So to argue they're right to not be interested because of whatever is wrong anyway, they are interested, and getting in with more competitors than Sony, just without attaching it to Xbox yet.

As for supporting "third party sets due to demand" that would just guarantee a flop, what software developers bother releasing console games that only work with some random third party accessory the first party isn't supporting with software itself?

Their best option would be to support their first party initiative, WMR (with third party manufacturers but of Microsoft's own standards so devs know exactly what works, rather than have to support all VR sets out there on Xbox), with software from themselves for third party devs to follow.

 

[HeresJohnny]

Actually it's pretty awesome. It's always better to have options.

Not when it takes away resources from what the primary use of the console should be. I’m fine if they want to release something as an optional add on down the road, but making VR an integral part of your console is a stupid, needless risk imo.

 

[Alexios]

Not when it takes away resources from what the primary use of the console should be. I’m fine if they want to release something as an optional add on down the road, but making VR an integral part of your console is a stupid, needless risk imo.

Whether from launch or not nobody suggested it would have to be bundled in though, that would definitely be dumb, as cool as VR is it's not for everyone if only by the cost alone so to make everyone pay for it would be silly. So yeah being optional is pretty much a given and not contested.

And Microsoft is developing VR whether they make it part of next Xbox or not so those resources are already taken away if that's how you see it, just not benefiting Xbox in return if they don't support it on it (which is still an unknown, random dev statement doesn't guarantee it).

 

[Karppuuna]

it's wrong move, when you actually test VR you can see admittedly that it's the future, it's another platform, the future is here!

 

[HeresJohnny]

it's wrong move, when you actually test VR you can see admittedly that it's the future, it's another platform, the future is here!

People said the same shit about the Wiimote and Kinect. It may be the future, it may not. Games and future technology will dictate that.

Edit: the number one thing you HAVE to have with a product like VR is a killer app. It’s a waste of time otherwise... people aren’t going to jump in if you can’t show them (before you expect them to buy it) why they have to have one. The “give us fire and we’ll give you wood” mentality of releasing tech with no impetus for the buyer to invest has gotten ridiculous. Make a game that compels the audience to go buy one. If you can’t come up with one, then maybe your priduct’s time has not come.

 

[Alexios]

People said the same shit about the Wiimote and Kinect. It may be the future, it may not. Games and future technology will dictate that.

Edit: the number one thing you HAVE to have with a product like VR is a killer app. It’s a waste of time otherwise... people aren’t going to jump in if you can’t show them (before you expect them to buy it) why they have to have one. The “give us fire and we’ll give you wood” mentality of releasing tech with no impetus for the buyer to invest has gotten ridiculous. Make a game that compels the audience to go buy one. If you can’t come up with one, then maybe your priduct’s time has not come.

Wiimote was a grand success and today's VR controllers are pretty much following its principles with modern technology though so, it was right to be said at the time. Hell, Nintendo shot itself in the foot when it didn't follow it up with an upgrade and focused elsewhere with the WiiU's flop.

But nah, I don't think many folks said it about Kinect, the failure was visible early on for anyone who wasn't drinking the PR kool aid and just looking at things from a more objective gaming benefits standpoint, ie, like VR advocates are doing these days after experiencing the best of it

Also Kinect didn't even work as advertised with fake demos, lol. VR (good VR, just as not every non VR game is as good as your favorite) works better than is conveyed. Off topic but I'm sure we'll see more Kinect-like but actually working tech eventually, there's cool tech being worked on.

More great VR games are getting made all the time, of course a first party offering VR will also have to provide some great games with it to show people what it does, nobody's saying to just dump hardware on people without games that show it off so, uh?

PSVR in its current lackluster/oudated tech-wise (I don't mean visually, just as you can play modern console/PC games in lower than 4K fine, I mean the playability/tech of its controllers) iteration doing well even without a made for VR first party AAA game only highlights VR's growth potential.

A potential Microsoft sees which is why they're working on VR and make it part of its biggest service/platform, Windows, hence this thread's premise and poll being 100% wrong even if they haven't (yet?) announced VR plans for their next console (as if they've announced many plans for that).

 

[ConnorDuffy1977]

Not when it takes away resources from what the primary use of the console should be.

I always thought games were the primary use. And now with VR, I have access to a lot more games. And regular games don't suffer at all. So it's a win-win.

 

[DarthBuzzer]

After the last launch disaster I think it's a very good thing that MS are going to avoid gimmicks and concentrate on delivering a basic, powerful console. That's all most gamers want. A good console with a good software library.

Gamers often don't know what they want.