You know you have lost the argument when you resort to ad hominem attacks instead of refuting claims. I'm the guy that has taken the middle ground saying there is a big market for both, but I guess that makes me the cult leader because I simply debunk poor arguments and ridiculous unsubstantiated claims.
A gimmick is something that's superficial to the experience and doesn't really make substantive changes to how games can be played. Wii waggle controls were pretty gimmicky, the IR aiming not so much. VR, especially room scale, is the opposite of a gimmick. You can't directly translate 1:1 motion controls and head tracking to pancake mode holding a controller.
That's not true. One of the most popular vr games is Moss which is a third person game. First person games aren't limited at all by controls. You pick up guns from your hostler instead of going into a menu or pressing a button. You pull out your map by reaching over your shoulder into your backpack. the controls are intuitive and not limited in the slightest.
Have you played Astrobot?
The controls are limited because you just can't play games like Halo 5 etc with all its co.olex movements and actions without a controller. 3rd person games can be played in VR, sure, but that's just the VR screen replacing the TV screen.
Movement isn't an issue in VR. You can move with an analog stick like any other game if you chose to do it. Or you can play in a large space and move yourself. I've played quake 2 in VR so I'm sure it can handle Halo 5's movement. No, third person games aren't just a screen in front of you. Moss isn't like that. I haven't played astrobot, but I don't think it's like that either.
For games like Hellblade VR, etc., I am totally fine with replacing the TV screen with the VR screen. In VR everything is life-sized, so you're not just watching a moving picture of Senua fighting, you're right beside her.
But again, playing Halo 5 etc with controllers in VR is just replacing the TV with a screen on a headset. That's not "VR gaming", and the tradeoff isn't there for most people. I don't want to sit there with a headset on blocking me off from the world just for a bit of "immersion".
You're moving the goalposts now. VR isn't just about swapping a tv for a headset. A lot of people do want to have things in 3d with full field of vision and be able to aim by pointing and shooting instead of right analog stick only. There already is a popular battle royal VR game called population one. VR is a natural fit for FPS games which is why you see a lot of mods for fps games(Doom 3, half-life, return to castle Wolfenstein, quake 1 and 2 ect) that were never intended for VR, but end up working incredibly well with full motion controls. This is probably the reason Sony wants games that work in both vr and flat gaming since it's proven to work incredibly well.
I'm not moving any goalposts. Pointing and shooting is never going to be viable in online multiplayer against people with controllers/m&kb, and single player games would have to be designed around it to cater for the fact that you can't just be 180-ing at the flick of a finger.
I wouldn't put gamepad on an even playing field with mouse unless we're talking about a game that has implemented gyroscope in which case motions controls in VR are absolutely on par with the precision and speed of a mouse/gyroscope. Judging by your responses i'm going to guess you have never played VR or played for a significant amount of time. You can do very quick 180 degree turns by either spinning yourself, spinning in a swivel chair, or using your right stick to spin just like you would on a traditional gamepad with two analog sticks.
Cope.You made a claim about VR directly hurting your eyes. This claim is what the other user was asking for a source for, not blue light affecting eyes.
So now despite your inability to understand the conversation on hand, you are resulting to claiming I have low IQ and to "take my meds".
You got called out and now you're making yourself look like a fool.
There has been nothing debunked. You thinking that a person physically spinning around is in any way comparable to doing it with the flick of a thumb or press of a button is not "debunking" anything. Games where the only use of VR is as a TV replacement is not the "future of gaming".
Did you miss the part where I said you can do the same thing with the right analog stick on the motion controls for vr?
But then whats the point of the VR? Just replacing the tv screen.
You really don't understand how VR works. If a player choses to turn with an analog stick it doesn't suddenly remove all of the other VR elements.
What's great about vr is you have options. If you want to play in a very large play space and use natural locomotion you can. If you want to sit down and play you can. You still have to point and aim, but you're free to use left analog stick for smooth locomotion, right analog stick for snap turning and smooth turning, or just physically turning.
VR, but far more likely AR, will absolutely be massive in the future. I don't think we'll get to the time in any of our lifetimes where VR is the default way gaming is done.
That assumption is based on an inexperience of VR.
It's not based on an inexperience of VR lol.
The fact that you say what's bolded absolutely does show it's an assumption based on inexperience. Seated VR games with gamepad is a thing, and they are some of the best VR games out there.
No, it doesn't say it's based on inexperience. You're just trying to dismiss any opinion that doesn't agree with yours.
Price is far from being the primary factor for VR diffusion. The first and most important factor, is overcoming motion sickness. The severity varies among people but most of people suffer from it in some amount, and that's really the main obstacle to enjoy it and to feel secure about letting friends try it. I, for example, am really enthusiastic about it and its future potential, but the fear of getting motion sickness is keeping far from it most of times. It's frustrating. I really hope the problem will be solved completely (maybe by some vibration able to fool inner ear making it feel acceleration, or some other solution. Some complete solution that will allow to move in a game in any way immaginable, without discomfort. That will be the start for unlimited gameplay imagination).
It doesn't matter. Whether you're using a gamepad or not, it's still VR. Therefore, if we assume a hypothetical future where VR is the most popular way to game as a combination of gamepad and haptic gloves (since motion controls will be long gone 20 years from now), that still counts even if it's a mix that gets it there.
Do you not understand that it's 3d?
I understand what VR is lol. I understand that it's 3D. Those things just won't be enough to make people put up with the downsides, namely the headset that you have to wear and the headphones that you have to wear just to see depth.
Again, I'm not sure you understand.
Price is bound to come down, also wouldn't surprised if the government doesn't want to chip you for free with a mind reading mind control device that also provides vr.
You know the difference between full dive and a flat screen?
