• 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.
  • Hi Guest. We've rebooted and consolidated our Communities section, so be sure to check it out and subscribe to some threads. Thanks!

Half-Life: Alyx Anouncement Trailer

Apr 18, 2007
13,208
600
1,245
damn this really makes me want HL3.

yeah it would be nice if this could be played without vr equipment.
 
Last edited:

cormack12

Gold Member
Mar 21, 2013
3,483
3,364
1,165
Gotta be honest.....

That blew me away. Looked incredible. That is a VR title that could actually onboard the critical mass of mainstream. From a software point of view at least. There are still the barriers of PC-VR. I own a PSVR and the low resolution really hurts the experience and I am really susceptible to 2/3 of the big VR issues at the moment (https://www.roadtovr.com/whats-the-difference-between-screen-door-effect-sde-mura-aliasing-vr-headset/) - screen door and Mura.

I could probably put up with that but when you factor into the equation wires, boxes, control boxes etc. I don't think the mainstream hardware is there for mass adoption. PCVR is better obviously but I'm probably still in that section of people who will wait to see what the trickle down to consoles looks like next year after dipping my toe in with the PSVR.
 

CausticVenom

Member
Apr 27, 2018
1,201
701
360
Super Mario Galaxy Odyssey/Pokemon Sword and Shield, Whats the difference? You still need to splash out on a Nintendo switch to play them.
They also don't have a starting price of $1000+ for both a headset and good hardware so it's not really the same.

But yes some games will only work in VR and that's okay too.
 

Kadayi

Banned
Oct 10, 2012
8,589
7,817
1,065
theconclave.net
Now you're speaking for all fans and what they want and assume anything new half-life could have been a "conclusion"? How's that what is vs what isn't? And how was I the one to bring money into it? You kept responding to excitement with "they just wanna sell you stuff". Selling is about money. even if you wanna convert it to just "sell you VR" as a concept that's still about money, I don't see them giving Index away for free anywhere just to make the technology more widespread. Again even fans conflate things between what we would have seen in a HL2: Episode 3 and an actual HL3. And fans usually don't want what they think they want anyway. Earlier you said they should have used a new IP to not struggle with people's expectations with Half-Life, ie have it easier, now you say a new IP would have been harder to do so they took the easy way out and made Half-Life, get real, you're grasping at this or that bit of an interview and ignoring other bits as just marketing talk to "sell you things" as if the whole interview isn't just PR anyway but somehow things that shouldn't have still rolled out of their tongues and you caught a glimpse of the real truth behind all this or something and can freely ignore the rest of the interview because it's just bs trying to sell you things. That's called confirmation bias, sorry to break it to you.
Reading through your post and going back through the thread I think you've misinterpreted what I meant when I said 'Market Stakehold' below: -

They've had several years to be passionate about concluding the Episodic trilogy, yet it never happened. You watched exactly the same video as I did and the key narrative was all about making a AAA VR Title to promote a technology they have a market stakehold in. HL happened to be the existing IP they found most viable to achieve that, nothing more nothing less.
I'm going to attempt to clarify this, and try and keep it as concise as possible in the process.

'Market stakehold' is not simply about money or short term profitability. It is a vested interest in a commercial arena in the long term, and Valve most definitely has that in spades. Firstly in digital sales and secondly and more recently in promoting VR, both of which they want to see go hand in hand.

To date Valves biggest commercial success hasn't been games, it's been Steam. As money-making ventures go it's been infinitely more profitable for them than any number of titles they've shipped past or present. Steams success freed them from the treadmill of delivery and profitability that hangs over most other development studios and operate in an experimental fashion somewhat akin to an entity like the MIT media lab for instance.

There have been positives to this in the added value they've been able to bring to Steam in terms of user-friendly features and the like (something most other digital stores have spectacularly failed to learn from). However, at the same time, there have been negatives, not the least of which has been a seeming lack of direction at times within the firm (a Bi-product of their work approach) with the result being a litany of cancelled projects over the years as well as a tangible apathy and tone-deafness when it comes both to maintaining their existing IPs and communicating effectively with the fans of said franchises. PR especially is not their strong point.

These negatives have arisen because in truth Valves primary focus when it comes to game development is in finding ways to strengthen user engagement with Steam because the more ubiquitous, essential and every day they can make a users engagement with the platform the more opportunity exists that said users will buy something from the storefront.

VR for Valve represents a new opportunity space in that regard. It's an exciting developing market that they've gotten into early on and they're heavily investing in pushing the technology because they want to both advance it (improved presence sells the experience as I'm sure all agree) and grow the user base. This extends far beyond games.

They're surprisingly frank about this in the Keighley interview: -



They looked at the market growth of VR and the reasons why uptick was so low and they concluded that this was in large part because VR presently lacks a clear AAA experience to draw people in, so they decided they needed to build it. They weighed up the pros and cons of their existing IPs and concluded that Half-Life despite having been shelved for over a decade-plus represented the best choice in that regard.

It is at this point though that a clear dichotomy arises because Valves interest in reviving the IP seems to be a combination of ease of use in terms of development at their end (no need to reinvent the IP wheel) and to capitalise on its brand name, whereas the interest for actual fans of the franchise has been for the next chapter in series that went AWOL in 2007 on a massive cliff hanger.

Brian057s post from earlier on is a great summary of the situation from a fan perspective: -

"I wish for a new Half-Life game."

Half-Life fans have been clamouring for a sequel to HL2:EP2 for over a decade now only to be met by radio silence by Valve (who have doggedly refused to discuss EP3 MIA status even with the gaming press). Yet when they do decide to announce a further game, not only does it carry an additional price tag for engagement in terms of a peripheral, but it's not even a sequel to boot.

It's a situation akin to Geoge Lucas forgoing making RotJ as a follow up to ESB, but instead disappearing for ten years and then announcing TPM but requiring you to buy a 3D home theatre to see it. Great for those who have 3D Home Theatres already and are just interested in basking in 3D gloriousness, less so for those who just want to find out what happens next after Luke not only discovers that he's been jacking it to thoughts of his twin sister (awkward) but also ends up having his Dad chop off his wanking hand in the process (double bummer). :messenger_dizzy:

I get why Valve is doing what they are doing. From a production standpoint, it makes a lot of sense to build out from an existing IP versus go back to the drawing board, especially when first and foremost your focus is on making a must-play VR experience to capture public attention and move the needle of the VR Market forward and in the process encourage other development studios to take VR seriously as a viable development avenue.

It also makes sense from the perspective of the Half-Life franchise not to make a direct sequel to EP2 VR only at this juncture straight off the bat, because that definitely wouldn't go across well with either the Fans or the Gaming Press in terms of the requisite price tag for entry, for the conclusion of a story, already 2/3rds told. A prequel might seem like a reasonable compromise in that regard, but for those fans who've been patiently waiting for that conclusion, it feels a bit 'really? This is what were doing now?'

Don't get me wrong I'm excited as anyone to experience HLA in action and as I hope that the game leads to more developers/publishers investing in creating compelling richer VR experiences (full-body haptic feedback suits already damn it), but also think it's important to understand that Valves motivations here aren't about giving fans what they want, or even initial unit sales (this announcement will sell far more Rift S than Index units given the price disparity) it's first and foremost about building and cementing their stakehold in the VR space and Steam as a goto for market for VR in the long term, and at this juncture the Half-Life IP represents a convenient stepping stone towards advancing that ambition. Will Valve ever make an EP3 or HL3? No reason to assume not, but I think in large part it's going to depend on how successful they are in achieving their ambitions with regard to moving that needle. IIRC Valve has talked about having two other large VR projects in development and maybe one of them is EP3/HL3 but I'm of the view that these are probably new IPs as that would afford them the opportunity to take VR in different directions that might not fit with the HL frame.
 

gifgaf

Gold Member
Jul 6, 2016
469
596
515
They also don't have a starting price of $1000+ for both a headset and good hardware so it's not really the same.

But yes some games will only work in VR and that's okay too.
It's exactly the same, what if I can't afford 300 for a switch or don't want to upgrade my WiiU to play Mario Odyssey? 300 or 1000 makes no difference if you can't afford it or do not want to pay extra to play new games.

I feel for people who are upset and want to play, I have been there too but it happens in all walks of life.
 
Last edited:

Stitch

Member
Nov 26, 2006
9,264
1,096
1,350
Half-Life fans have been clamouring for a sequel to HL2:EP2 for over a decade now only to be met by radio silence by Valve (who have doggedly refused to discuss EP3 MIA status even with the gaming press). Yet when they do decide to announce a further game, not only does it carry an additional price tag for engagement in terms of a peripheral, but it's not even a sequel to boot.
We don't know that. While it starts as a prequel it seems that it might be more than that and at least also takes place during the events of the previous episodes.


Maybe it even shows us what happens next? I mean right now we have seen like a minute of game footage..
 
Last edited:

eot

Member
Apr 13, 2012
10,171
515
650
i guess it's about time i play the exisiting Half Life games :messenger_tears_of_joy:

seriously though i didn't buy a headset just for Alyx. i just think it's cool and i've always wanted one. i have some money in the bank so why not treat myself. i'll probably pick up Alyx though
In all honesty, HL2 doesn't hold up very well.

edit: go replay it, the boat / car sections are simply a drag
Ep2 is still good
 
Last edited:

Kadayi

Banned
Oct 10, 2012
8,589
7,817
1,065
theconclave.net
We don't know that. While it starts as a prequel it seems that it might be more than that and at least also takes place during the events of the previous episodes.


Maybe it even shows us what happens next? I mean right now we have seen like a minute of game footage..
If anything it points perhaps to Alyx having been shown some insight into future events by the Vortigaunts and perhaps believing that Gordon is the key required to stop events from playing out (way to go, Gordon, you had one job, one job you mute motherfucker). if we were getting anything beyond that, they wouldn't be calling it a prequel versus EP3/HL3. Still, keep believing

 
Last edited:

GlassAwful

Member
Dec 4, 2016
448
271
330
When they announced the game as taking place before HL2 earlier this week and VNN made mention of it featuring grabbity gloves I pretty much figured it would be based on at least one of the leaked concepts for Episode 3 and the Alyx expansion they hinted at a decade ago.

I mean why would she have grabbity gloves that turn into the much clunkier gravity gun ten+ years later? Seems the gloves are more advanced.

Either they will hand wave the technology difference and its nothing or the game starts out right at the end of Episode 2 before Alyx is wisked away to the past, gravity gun in hand, where it is destroyed in the process and then reverse engineered into the gloves.

I think as others suggest the game will be about preventing the events of HL2 and episodes and the trailer is cut and presented as a misdirection, same with the interviews and such. Or its much simpler and everything is a flashback to show Eli's betrayal to mankind and his and Alyx's relationship to make his death hit harder....

What I originally thought when VNN mentioned the game leaning on nostalgia was she would go back to Black Mesa to stop Gordon's test but maybe that will be the ending of Alyx. I think it will ultimately lead there so they can have a fresh universe to play with for an eventual HL3 with a reboot and provide closure to Episode 2 by basically never going beyond it.
 

CausticVenom

Member
Apr 27, 2018
1,201
701
360
It's exactly the same, what if I can't afford 300 for a switch or don't want to upgrade my WiiU to play Mario Odyssey? 300 or 1000 makes no difference if you can't afford it or do not want to pay extra to play new games.

I feel for people who are upset and want to play, I have been there too but it happens in all walks of life.
It's about the hitches you have to go through. $300 for one console instead of 3 is very affordable, but when you need both the headset and a capable PC...

IDK, I think the price makes a difference. The entry fee is steep.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zannegan

Zannegan

Member
Feb 20, 2018
901
495
420
It's about the hitches you have to go through. $300 for one console instead of 3 is very affordable, but when you need both the headset and a capable PC...

IDK, I think the price makes a difference. The entry fee is steep.
The entry fee is steep today, but I think Valve is trying to play the long game with this one. As the price for VR headsets comes down and PC parts that can run this become the baseline, there will be at least one narrative killer app for people to play that says VR is more that just a party trick platform.

Plus, with a new generation of consoles just around the corner and at least one of them planning to support VR in a significant way, the barrier for entry could be acceptably low for quite a few people sooner than you might think.
 
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: CausticVenom

gifgaf

Gold Member
Jul 6, 2016
469
596
515
It's about the hitches you have to go through. $300 for one console instead of 3 is very affordable, but when you need both the headset and a capable PC...

IDK, I think the price makes a difference. The entry fee is steep.
My brother doesn't have a job and can't afford a switch, so to him 300 is as out of reach as a 500 PC and a 300 headset, which is probably around base price for a full VR set up. If you do your research or go second hand you could get it cheaper.

On the other hand Randy Pitchford is bitching about it being an "Index exclusive" yet I'm pretty sure he can afford to buy a headset.

Nintendo gating it's games to Switch is the same, price is factor only if you can't afford it.
 
Last edited:

Mendax89

Member
May 21, 2019
75
196
325
VR was a failure in gaming, it's a niche. VR limits the game mechanics. You can't play for long. VR is good for interactive movies, not for playing. This is a tech demo to sell the VR software, only dumb fanboys will buy this.
 
Jan 25, 2018
5,105
6,846
650
30
Southeastern USA
Yeah, I'm shit out of luck on this, can't afford VR in its current price range.

It really sucks as this looks great, I waited 12 years for Half-Life to come back and it's a game I literally can't play, we're back to 15 years ago when I couldn't play Half-Life 2 despite wanting to so badly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gifgaf

hariseldon

Gold Member
Aug 22, 2018
3,754
6,465
655
Wish I could play it. One day, perhaps, but right now I can't justify building a pro VR entertainment room anytime in the coming years with all the family purchases and home upgrades on our list.
FWIW my setup is quite simple. I have my man-cave which is just a box-room bedroom where I have my desktop PC and doubles as an office/study for when I need to work from home. Desk has my 3 monitors on it (a throwback to when I sim-raced without VR), one base station on a book-shelf, another perched on a printer and the third on the floor in the corner behind me. I don't bother taking them up or down. The Rift (CV1) headset I simply store in a draw when not in use as the cables can be easily unplugged when required.

Btw I've seen a few people saying room scale on the Rift isn't as good as Vive or Index - I can't speak for those as I've not tried them but I've thrown myself around the room playing Superhot VR dodging bullets, grabbing guns and throwing knives at people and had no issues whatsoever other than the occasional crash into a wall (it tells you when you're getting near a wall but I'm a special kind of idiot). Note that I have the Rift CV1 with the base stations and not the Rift S which I'm told doesn't use them - I sense that might not be so good as I can't imagine the hand tracking works as well without the base stations due to line of sight issues from helmet to hand.
 

hariseldon

Gold Member
Aug 22, 2018
3,754
6,465
655
You walk around with an analog stick (or choose to use teleportation or dash locomotion), it would not be very interesting to have them zoom in on a guy's thumb in a video to show this.

How is handling a gun or grabbing objects with your hands almost as in real life with a little extra abstraction or simplification for the sake of fun and ease of use (vs pressing E to have them float in mid air or drag crosshair/camera with a mouse) a Wii mini game?

Here are a couple videos that show people playing various FPS games in VR, it's got nothing to do with Wii mini games (or Wii great games). The 2nd is the one with the most not-just-gun-shooting interactions displayed. But none of it is AAA production value stuff like Alyx.

Also when you watch footage they sadly seem to most often choose the left eye view from the stereoscopic 3D VR as the 2D view so you don't see how they may be properly lining up the rifle sights and scopes to their right eye and such but that's what they do (when not spraying and praying).
Oh my god that walking dead game looks fucking amazing!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Al3x1s
Sep 14, 2014
111
109
380
Making the game for VR would be similar to making the game for Mac only, except with a fraction of the Mac audience, needing a 4m^2 clear space minimum to even use it, and a pretty decent PC on top of that.

The best part about the game is it has a proper development team behind it with money aiming solely for VR. Closest I can think of was RE7 which was not a VR game.

Beat Saber
Store | Hub
1,187
playing 34 min ago
2,483
24-hour peak
42,095
all-time peak

This is the best they can do right now. Pretty much every other VR game is dead.
 

gifgaf

Gold Member
Jul 6, 2016
469
596
515
I am not going to argue with you that VR has big numbers, I have never said it has mass market appeal but I will point out the bullshit you are saying like this.
needing a 4m^2 clear space minimum to even use it
This is complete crap. I have not played a roomscale game in ages where I was walking around, most games I play I sit down and move around like you would normally do in a flat screen game with sliding movement so no, you do not have to have a 4m^2 clear space, I dont have that much space anywhere for my main VR, I also sit on my sofa to play Oculus Quest games as its portable. You really should do your research before you pretend to know what your talking about.

Some poeple have this image that your running around an arena playing VR games, where in reality most games can and are played sat down without moving. Room scale is impressive when done right but devs know that most people want to play games sat down, only a few force roomscale and even then they could be played without moving.

The best part about the game is it has a proper development team behind it with money aiming solely for VR. Closest I can think of was RE7 which was not a VR game.
There are a few big titles especially on the Oculus store and PSVR, but I guess you would not know that being someone who likes to throw random "Facts" about VR without knowing if they are true or not.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Kadayi

CausticVenom

Member
Apr 27, 2018
1,201
701
360
My brother doesn't have a job and can't afford a switch, so to him 300 is as out of reach as a 500 PC and a 300 headset, which is probably around base price for a full VR set up. If you do your research or go second hand you could get it cheaper.

On the other hand Randy Pitchford is bitching about it being an "Index exclusive" yet I'm pretty sure he can afford to buy a headset.

Nintendo gating it's games to Switch is the same, price is factor only if you can't afford it.
This is fair.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gifgaf

Wonko_C

Member
Jul 5, 2010
4,620
736
930
Cancun, Mexico.
I still can't forgive Geoff for "By the way VR GOTY winner is Astro Bot KTHXBye" but seems like he's genuinely excited for the game, at least to the point of calling out PC Gamer on their BS.

 
  • Like
Reactions: sol_bad

blly155

Member
Aug 3, 2014
10,365
2,129
580
i see the "i hope they let us play it without VR" people are out in force.

i get it. they are gonna be locking out a lot of people because of the VR requirement. but the simple facts are:

A) the game is not designed to be played without VR.
B) valve wants to sell headsets. in particular their own Index.
C) someone needs to push VR if it is to succeed.

They are not gonna rework the entire game. they want to sell Index headsets. they want VR to become more popular/accessible.

So basically they are saying:

"You want to play it? Buy a headset. Otherwise keep crying"

:)
 
Last edited:

rofif

Member
Sep 13, 2019
595
716
430
<-- taking a sip of water while reading on my phone



VR games are expanded on micromanagement mechanics. You can pick objects and manipulate them as You wish. There is no reason touch or index controllers couldn't be supported in traditional games.... why not.
But to say the truth, while in vr You focus on picking up objects and moving them around, In a traditional game YOu just have a gun and use it and don't think about how You do this.
With limited movement around space in Your room (walking with sticks in vr makes me sick and teleportation sucks ass) and limitation of body physique as that You really have to move, aim and do everything as in real life, I find it IMPOSSIBLE right now to replay scenarios from Uncharted games, sekiro or even quake 3 deathmatch.
You can manipulate 3d objects incredibly well but in 2d games You just have a gun sticked in the corner and move outside of Your physical abilities
 

Hudo

Member
Jul 26, 2018
2,476
2,563
400
I still can't forgive Geoff for "By the way VR GOTY winner is Astro Bot KTHXBye" but seems like he's genuinely excited for the game, at least to the point of calling out PC Gamer on their BS.

That's PCGamer's sole raison d’être, judging by the last couple of years. Producing articles based on bad takes.

Also, trying to correctly infer arm and joint positions based on hand position is not a trivial problem to solve. At its simplest, it's a SAT solving problem, which is already non-trivial for real-time applications (NP-complete and all that. Though, I believe some strides have been made for certain cases). We've got a prototype running but it has lots of constraints to actually be feasible for real-time VR (for our setup). But there are even more factors to consider (what and how you pick something up/hold something also affects joint and arm positions, etc.). We've got some researchers actually still investigating this whole topic. I also believe that either Mel Slater or Jeremy Bailenson argued against depicting arms or that the correct(!) depiction of arms isn't significantly affecting immersion and presence in VR, but are extremely impactful, in a negative way, when depicted incorrectly.
 

Shai-Tan

Member
Mar 16, 2009
5,752
415
870
"micromanagement" could be good if it contributes to more "verbs". having to rummage and pick up bullets - "resource management" - can be good in the right type of game. I think that level of interactivity also has the potential to get us away from overuse of the "batman vision" so many games use but the substitute has to be interesting in its own right. it really depends on what kind of game it is - like finger tracking seems questionable for this aside from immersion pushing buttons or whatever
 
  • Like
Reactions: rofif

Moses85

Member
Jan 7, 2018
436
233
245
Ok... at the day of reveal I said, I won’t buy a PC and VR Gear to play this game..

Now, some days later I feel like 2004. I was Console only but I built a PC only for HL2.

To the PC gamers here, how much I must invest for a PC including VR to enjoy Half Life Alyx the most?

Thanks
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wonko_C and gifgaf

gifgaf

Gold Member
Jul 6, 2016
469
596
515
Ok... at the day of reveal I said, I won’t buy a PC and VR Gear to play this game..

Now, some days later I feel like 2004. I was Console only but I built a PC only for HL2.

To the PC gamers here, how much I must invest for a PC including VR to enjoy Half Life Alyx the most?

Thanks
If you feel you have to get this game why not wait? No one knows how well this game will be recieved, it could be trash. The game is not released for a while and who knows if prices will drop by then. Don't feel pressured into getting a VR headset for one game if you were not sold on it before imo.

Do you know anyone with a PCVR headset or even a PSVR headset to see if its worth the price of admission to you personally?
 
Last edited:

Kadayi

Banned
Oct 10, 2012
8,589
7,817
1,065
theconclave.net
A) the game is not designed to be played without VR.
B) valve wants to sell headsets. in particular their own Index.
C) someone needs to push VR if it is to succeed.
I think their main focus as I said earlier in the thread is about pushing the needle in terms of an audience growth with VR to make it a more attractive option for other developers/publishers, and allow Valve to Grow the Steam VR catalogue. Given the disparity between the Index and the Rift S I expect Oculus will benefit more from HLA than Valve in Unit sales, as the price of the Index is on par with a new GPU and then that becomes a weighing option between buying a peripheral that benefits a few games versus an upgrade that benefits all games. Obviously people in the 'why not both.gif' camp don't have to worry about these things, but they're the exception rather than the rule.

I wouldn't be surprised if Valve is looking to make a more affordable VR solution on a par with either the Rift S or Index down the road, and from the setup perspective, I expect them to drop the base stations and adopt Oculus camera system approach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gifgaf

Moses85

Member
Jan 7, 2018
436
233
245
If you feel you have to get this game why not wait? No one knows how well this game will be recieved, it could be trash. The game is not released for a while and who knows if prices will drop by then. Don't feel pressured into getting a VR headset for one game if you were not sold on it before imo.

Do you know anyone with a PCVR headset or even a PSVR headset to see if its worth the price of admission to you personally?
I play regularly with my PSVR. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: gifgaf

gifgaf

Gold Member
Jul 6, 2016
469
596
515
I wouldn't be surprised if Valve is looking to make a more affordable VR solution on a par with either the Rift S or Index down the road, and from the setup perspective, I expect them to drop the base stations and adopt Oculus camera system approach.
I agree this is a good compromise going forward for VR imo.

Originally I used the Lighthouse system then moved onto Oculus Rift camera system which I thought was just as good if setup properly with 3 camera's. I was not convinced that the camera system on Windows Mixed Reality headsets was the way forward being an admittedly tracking snob. After getting a Rift S and Oculus quest I love not being tied to Camera's or Lighthouse's which I think is a downside to VR. Oculus Quest is a step towards how I would like to play VR.

Not being forced to play one static area is nice. My PC is in my living room and I have an area set aside for VR where my Oculus camera's are still setup but with the Rift S I can move out of that area and sit on my Sofa to play.

Tracking is not 360 like the Lighthouse but after playing for a few months I feel its pretty impressive and good enough. I have not missed the 360 tracking I used before and appreciate the freedom much more.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Romulus and Kadayi

Kadayi

Banned
Oct 10, 2012
8,589
7,817
1,065
theconclave.net
I agree this is a good compromise going forward for VR imo.

Originally I used the Lighthouse system then moved onto Oculus Rift camera system which it thought was just as good if setup properly with 3 camera's. I was not convinced that the camera system on Windows Mixed Reality headsets was the way forward being an admittedly tracking snob. After getting a Rift S and Oculus quest I love not being tied to Camera's or Lighthouse's which I think is a downside to VR. Oculus Quest is a step towards how I would like to play VR.

Not being forced to play one static area is nice. My PC is in my living room and I have an area set aside for VR where my Oculus camera's are still setup but with the Rift S I can move out of that area and sit on my Sofa to play.

Tracking is not 360 like the Lighthouse but after playing for a few months I feel its pretty impressive and good enough. I have not missed the 360 tracking I used before and appreciate the freedom much more.
The optics on affordability is definitely an issue for VR in terms of adoption. I feel like a lot of people are looking at HLA automatically thinking gotta buy an Index seeing that price tag and just 'nopeing' out straight away versus considering the alternative solutions as evinced by a lot of the commentary in these threads. I dare say that the base stations are great if you've got the room in terms of the tracking, but honestly, I think for most people space is a luxury, and extra peripherals just mean extra cables/power supplies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gifgaf and Romulus

Wonko_C

Member
Jul 5, 2010
4,620
736
930
Cancun, Mexico.
i see the "i hope they let us play it without VR" people are out in force.

i get it. they are gonna be locking out a lot of people because of the VR requirement. but the simple facts are:

A) the game is not designed to be played without VR.
B) valve wants to sell headsets. in particular their own Index.
C) someone needs to push VR if it is to succeed.

They are not gonna rework the entire game. they want to sell Index headsets. they want VR to become more popular/accessible.

So basically they are saying:

"You want to play it? Buy a headset. Otherwise keep crying"

:)
And it's not like there aren't and won't be any more games released in the future. When I buy a new system it motivates me in finding more games for that system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kadayi and Romulus

Grinchy

Member
Aug 3, 2010
22,455
5,713
1,090
In a cave outside of Whooville.
Seeing people have an issue with "floating hands" is so strange to me. A person who looks at a video and says "floating hands" is guaranteed to have never tried VR, right?

It's like when people jump in every VR thread for months to let everyone know how much it sucks and then they get stuck in a spot where they have to describe VR and say it's just like looking at a movie theater screen that's playing a game. Suddenly you realize they've spent months shit-talking this thing they've never even tried.
 
Last edited:

rofif

Member
Sep 13, 2019
595
716
430
"micromanagement" could be good if it contributes to more "verbs". having to rummage and pick up bullets - "resource management" - can be good in the right type of game. I think that level of interactivity also has the potential to get us away from overuse of the "batman vision" so many games use but the substitute has to be interesting in its own right. it really depends on what kind of game it is - like finger tracking seems questionable for this aside from immersion pushing buttons or whatever
You can do many gestures on oculus too. Thumbs up, pointing finger, both, grip, fist, open hand. Its very intuitive too and the stick is good on that controller.

Question to others who used new headsets:
Btw any idea what is the eyes focal distance on Quest compared to S ?
On S I did not needed my glasses like I did on cv1 or dk units. On S it seemed to be about 1 meter so my -2 eyesight was still ok. Is quest the same?
Remember that older headsets focused eyes on infinity so things were just as sharp to me as in real life things far away without glasses
 
Last edited:

Merlot

Neo Member
Nov 16, 2019
5
5
110
“Did you get a new Half-Life?”
“Yes.”
“What did it cost?”
“Team Fortress 2.”

This comment under a certain video greatly summarizes my feelings towards this announcement.
Although i am happy to hear Valve is releasing an actual game this time after so many years, i also know how it is a last nail to the coffin for TF2.


There are no people assigned to TF2 right now, except maybe one person just doing as a "keep an eye on" person.
It is confirmed Valve announced "All Hands on Deck" with Alyx, this includes TF2 devs as few of them also had previous HL development experience.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Gashtronomy