PSVR is the best-selling VR headset so far this year

Feb 24, 2015
1,773
105
260
#51
It's decent for what you're getting for the price and as an introduction to VR. Especially with how low the price was during Black Friday and Cyber Monday. I don't find any of this to that surprising.
 
Last edited:

BANGS

Fresh single BANGS in your area, or in my browser.
Dec 13, 2016
3,883
1,562
440
#52
There is no self regulation. Almost everyone uses gimmick as a widely negative word. It also becomes an excuse. "I don't want Microsoft to invest in any more gimmicks after Kinect", "VR is a gimmick, not interested."
The word having a negative connotation doesn't take away it's actual meaning. Some people aren't interested in gimmicks, that's not an excuse that's just their reality. I like gimmicks, but they get boring and tiring after awhile and I like to go back to traditional gaming from them pretty quickly. VR is no exception...
 
Likes: lukilladog
Jul 30, 2018
281
364
180
London, UK & Kailua, HI.
#53
I finally bought one, with the light gun thingy when SONY were pretty much giving them away at the end of summer. It's alright. The fun soon wears off, and it's not long before the battle to get it on your head, sort out the wires and offset looking like a total pillock outweigh the minimal fun you get from the very basic "games" you can play on it at the moment.
 

olimariOA

Neo Member
Nov 28, 2018
76
96
130
Texas
#54
I finally bought one, with the light gun thingy when SONY were pretty much giving them away at the end of summer. It's alright. The fun soon wears off, and it's not long before the battle to get it on your head, sort out the wires and offset looking like a total pillock outweigh the minimal fun you get from the very basic "games" you can play on it at the moment.
This is just a side effect of the tech being young and the adoption rate being low.
VR isn't very far from "it just works" territory with no wires and total ease of us.

And if PSVR2 is packed in with PS5 then companies will make games for it en masse.
Only time will tell, though.
 
Jul 9, 2018
442
180
175
#55
The word having a negative connotation doesn't take away it's actual meaning. Some people aren't interested in gimmicks, that's not an excuse that's just their reality. I like gimmicks, but they get boring and tiring after awhile and I like to go back to traditional gaming from them pretty quickly. VR is no exception...
Traditional gaming is a gimmick by the same definition. It's a complete contradiction to say you get bored of gimmicks but then go back to a gimmick. (again, using that definition)

Switching between VR and non-VR is fine, but then using the word gimmick in that context makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
May 23, 2018
569
722
250
#56
The word having a negative connotation doesn't take away it's actual meaning. Some people aren't interested in gimmicks, that's not an excuse that's just their reality. I like gimmicks, but they get boring and tiring after awhile and I like to go back to traditional gaming from them pretty quickly. VR is no exception...
I didn't realize my Game of the Year, Astro Bot, was a gimmick. Why? Because you said so? Are you the King of Video Games? If VR is a gimmick, so are video games. Perhaps you are a gimmick as well.
 
Likes: DarthBuzzer
Aug 20, 2008
9,584
372
825
#57
If Sony integrates VR into PS5 and makes it mandatory, wasting resources and driving up the price tag I´m jumping ship.
I'm sure the breakout box tech will be built into it. And that needs to happen as having that extra box and all those cables is a fucking mess. I can't imagine that costs much though. No way the force a headset in every Sku though.
 

ZywyPL

Neo Member
Nov 27, 2018
85
44
105
#58
That's pretty much obvious, given Sony not only produces the VR goggles alone, but also the unified hardware that's running it, and finally and most importantly - they actually make games for it. PSVR is basically the one and only VR set that has rights to exist, because it's a complete ecosystem, owned by one company, whereas all the other VR producers care only about selling the VR googles and that's it - there's PC, over which nobody has any control, so it's impossible to optimize the software for it, and they don't make games for their own hardware, nor they intend to.

I read delusional comments in the "VR is stalling for no reasons" thread stating that "the technology is not there yet", "wait till the right technology shows up" etc. and that's exactly what I mean - those manufactures care only about selling the googles, so they will keep fooling naive people that higher resolution or refreshrate will bring better experience, while going all the way up to 2x64K 240Hz googles will still be a softwareless VR, and software is where the actual experience comes from.

Sony on the other hand due to all mentioned reasons can basically monolpolise entire VR market, they already have all the puzzles, so if they implement VR directly into PS5 and price the console low enough, this might be the moment when the VR will take off. However, there's also risk that it will go in the opposite direction - as many VR threads show, pleople have literally unlimited reasons to dislike VR, or simply not get into it, so going heavily into VR might turn away people from Sony's console and opt for MS instead, which in the end result will only decrease the potential VR userbase. Curious to see how it will end up.
 
Jul 9, 2018
442
180
175
#59
That's pretty much obvious, given Sony not only produces the VR goggles alone, but also the unified hardware that's running it, and finally and most importantly - they actually make games for it. PSVR is basically the one and only VR set that has rights to exist, because it's a complete ecosystem, owned by one company, whereas all the other VR producers care only about selling the VR googles and that's it - there's PC, over which nobody has any control, so it's impossible to optimize the software for it, and they don't make games for their own hardware, nor they intend to.
This is false. There are dozens of games made / invested by Oculus including more on the way, like a heavy hitter AAA title from insomniac and another from Respawn. Valve are making their own games as well, possibly for their own HMD to take advantage of. (but not be exclusive to)

I read delusional comments in the "VR is stalling for no reasons" thread stating that "the technology is not there yet", "wait till the right technology shows up" etc. and that's exactly what I mean - those manufactures care only about selling the googles, so they will keep fooling naive people that higher resolution or refreshrate will bring better experience, while going all the way up to 2x64K 240Hz googles will still be a softwareless VR, and software is where the actual experience comes from.
VR is different than monitor gaming. Increasing specs does objectively improve games to a much higher extent. That doesn't mean the game itself is better from a design standpoint, or that it deserves a higher score, it's that your end experience is better, and considerably so. But yes, in the context of gaming, software is everything so without any good software, it's not sustainable. But we do have good software, so we're waiting for AAA sustainable software which as I mentioned, is on the way.

Sony on the other hand due to all mentioned reasons can basically monolpolise entire VR market, they already have all the puzzles, so if they implement VR directly into PS5 and price the console low enough, this might be the moment when the VR will take off. However, there's also risk that it will go in the opposite direction - as many VR threads show, pleople have literally unlimited reasons to dislike VR, or simply not get into it, so going heavily into VR might turn away people from Sony's console and opt for MS instead, which in the end result will only decrease the potential VR userbase. Curious to see how it will end up.
Sony can't monopolize the market. Right now, Oculus are the furthest ahead in R&D, and believe me, it doesn't take anything more than current virtual desktop applications for VR to have a huge use case as a viable screen replacement, as Oculus shoots ahead with their advances. The standalone VR market will also be much bigger than the console VR market too. Sony may be able to monopolize VR in gaming, but they are unlikely to be a huge general VR player.
 
Last edited:
Likes: ThatOneGrunt
Jun 14, 2018
217
172
170
#60
The word having a negative connotation doesn't take away it's actual meaning. Some people aren't interested in gimmicks, that's not an excuse that's just their reality. I like gimmicks, but they get boring and tiring after awhile and I like to go back to traditional gaming from them pretty quickly. VR is no exception...
Well, you are wrong on the actual meaning/defenition, so theres that. "A trick or device primarily intended to attract attention, publicity, or business (and the bit you so convieniently left out), often with little intrinsic value/substance.
 
Aug 20, 2008
9,584
372
825
#61
The main advantage Sony has is lower cost of entry. A lot of people don't even have desktop computers at home anymore, much less gaming pcs, as most users switched to laptops/phones/tablets unless they work from home a lot and need a desk and desktop.

So on top off a $200-300+ (and quite a bit more a launch and possibly again if the next gen ones jump up in price again) headset you're looking at several hundred to $1,000 to get a decent PC that can run VR games well. Vs a lot of gamers already having a console and if not being able to grab one for $200-300 rather than a few times that for a decent VR capable PC.

VR truly going mainstream will take two things. 1) Getting great VR in a standalone device that doesn't require a PC or gaming console. 2) Price for that getting into the $100-200 range. That probably won't happen until streaming/cloud computing tech/internet speed and availability advances a lot.

Until then, console VR will have the best change of selling more due to the lower cost of entry for people who aren't already PC gamers.
 
#62
This is great news for PSVR and VR as a gaming medium in general. I think there will always be nay-sayers who will say VR is a gimmick or a fad, it always seems to come from people that dont own VR headsets and have not really sat down with one in the comfort of their own home to allow themselves to be immersed. Although its first gen VR, at the price they are offering starter sets with a couple of games, its anybodies loss for atleast not really allowing yourself to sit and take in the worlds of Astrobot or Moss.

In a way I understand why its easy to dismiss after the waggle of the Wii, the bundled in Kinect at the start of this gen for Xbox One, which Microsoft abandoned pretty soon afterwards. Its frustrating to pay your hard earned money only to be disappointed and have a product left unsupported that you supported with your wallet.

PSVR isn't that, the technology still needs progression but as a gamer of 30+ years, Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft all needed technology to progress each generation to get us to where we are today and VR will go through those same motions. I think the big thing to mention is the fact that I don't believe VR will ever replace flat gaming, after owning my PSVR and getting alot of play time out of it with a collection of about 20 dedicated VR games, not to mention games that already had VR functionality, for me personally VR has earned a spot beside flat gaming,

I don't buy into the fact that its too cumbersome, especially after playing games like Firewall Zero Hour, Superhot VR and Beat Saber which are all heavily movement based, in the case of Beat Saber that has to be the biggest movement based game for the PSVR right now and I've never had an issue..

Theres just too much to be had at this point, the end of this year alone has been insane for quality games on PSVR with Borderlands 2 still to come. In my 30+ yrs of gaming, VR is the most progressive, innovative gaming related purchase I've ever made and I can't wait to tell my grandchildren some day that I got in on the ground floor of mainstream VR gaming.
 

BANGS

Fresh single BANGS in your area, or in my browser.
Dec 13, 2016
3,883
1,562
440
#63
Traditional gaming is a gimmick by the same definition. It's a complete contradiction to say you get bored of gimmicks but then go back to a gimmick. (again, using that definition)
Switching between VR and non-VR is fine, but then using the word gimmick in that context makes no sense.
Okay sure, you're right. Excuse me while I go play my new favorite fighting game, pokemon let's go...

I didn't realize my Game of the Year, Astro Bot, was a gimmick. Why? Because you said so? Are you the King of Video Games? If VR is a gimmick, so are video games. Perhaps you are a gimmick as well.
Sorry your grapes went sour dude, but not Astro Bot is not a gimmick. The forced VR is the gimmick, as Astro Bot would be every bit as good as a traditional game, if not better...

Well, you are wrong on the actual meaning/defenition, so theres that. "A trick or device primarily intended to attract attention, publicity, or business (and the bit you so convieniently left out), often with little intrinsic value/substance.
I didn't leave anything out, that part wasn't in the definition I found. And again like I said, many gamers would agree VR fits that definition...
 
Mar 12, 2014
2,977
1,511
355
#64
If Sony integrates VR into PS5 and makes it mandatory, wasting resources and driving up the price tag I´m jumping ship.
I have to admit they are selling more than I expected this year. But I still share your sentiments. All this speculation along those lines has me nervous. If true it would be equivalent to saying: We should copy what did MS to screw themselves before this generation even began.
 

BANGS

Fresh single BANGS in your area, or in my browser.
Dec 13, 2016
3,883
1,562
440
#65
I think there will always be nay-sayers who will say VR is a gimmick or a fad, it always seems to come from people that dont own VR headsets and have not really sat down with one in the comfort of their own home to allow themselves to be immersed.
And this is why VR fanboys will always be the worst kind of fanboys, because they actually are so delusional that they believe the only way people could not enjoy VR is by not trying it. Every criticism can just be dismissed by accusing the critic of not playing VR, or not playing the right software on the right hardware, during the right time of the year wearing a certain type of clothes. Guess what? There are tons of gamers, myself included, who have given VR a fair shake and perhaps even continue to try new games often and still prefer traditional gaming and don't see a big future for VR. Until you guys accept that fact, you will always been looked at as delusional fanboys...
 
May 23, 2018
569
722
250
#66
Sorry your grapes went sour dude, but not Astro Bot is not a gimmick. The forced VR is the gimmick, as Astro Bot would be every bit as good as a traditional game, if not better...
Aside from the fact that your statement exudes ignorance on the subject matter, we have example of the same games being available in both traditional and VR formats. Resident Evil is better in VR. Wipeout Omega Collection is better in VR.

So what are you basing your "Astro Bot would be just as good or better" on? (Let's ignore the fact that unlike the previous two games I mentioned, Astro Bot could not exist without VR and would be a completely different game, which again the fact that you didn't know that points to your ignorance here).
 
Likes: gifgaf
Jul 9, 2018
442
180
175
#67
Sorry your grapes went sour dude, but not Astro Bot is not a gimmick. The forced VR is the gimmick, as Astro Bot would be every bit as good as a traditional game, if not better...
Please tell me you're joking. No one that has ever played Astro Bot would agree. No one. Astro Bot would always be better in VR, and that's a fact. It would always be inferior outside. And it would require a completely different game to even do. And even then, no one would prefer that new game from a game quality standpoint. (Some would prefer it due to the bulk of current VR etc)
 
Last edited:
Likes: gifgaf
Jul 9, 2018
442
180
175
#68
And this is why VR fanboys will always be the worst kind of fanboys, because they actually are so delusional that they believe the only way people could not enjoy VR is by not trying it. Every criticism can just be dismissed by accusing the critic of not playing VR, or not playing the right software on the right hardware, during the right time of the year wearing a certain type of clothes. Guess what? There are tons of gamers, myself included, who have given VR a fair shake and perhaps even continue to try new games often and still prefer traditional gaming and don't see a big future for VR. Until you guys accept that fact, you will always been looked at as delusional fanboys...
If you don't see a big future for VR, this means you don't even know what VR can do. Simple as that. You don't know that 360 6DoF videos are going to be like literal magic. You don't know that social VR will be unbelievably powerful. You don't know that you can replace any screen and have a better work environment, and the many use cases that entails. You don't know that VR headsets will do mixed reality. You don't know there is a roughly 99% use case cure for motion sickness. You don't know many of the types of games and experiences that are already possible with VR.

So yes, experience and knowledge is everything if you want an informed opinion.
 
Last edited:
Jan 21, 2015
1,172
369
295
#69
I really hope the VR integration doesn't drive the price of PS5 up TOO much. If it does, then I will skip it, as I really just am not in the market for a home VR headset to play games.

VR has lots of interesting potential uses once the tech gets there, but PSVR just isn't for me.
 
Likes: BANGS

BANGS

Fresh single BANGS in your area, or in my browser.
Dec 13, 2016
3,883
1,562
440
#70
Aside from the fact that your statement exudes ignorance on the subject matter, we have example of the same games being available in both traditional and VR formats. Resident Evil is better in VR. Wipeout Omega Collection is better in VR.

So what are you basing your "Astro Bot would be just as good or better" on? (Let's ignore the fact that unlike the previous two games I mentioned, Astro Bot could not exist without VR and would be a completely different game, which again the fact that you didn't know that points to your ignorance here).
Please tell me you're joking. No one that has ever played Astro Bot would agree. No one. Astro Bot would always be better in VR, and that's a fact. It would always be inferior outside. And it would require a completely different game to even do. And even then, no one would prefer that new game from a game quality standpoint. (Some would prefer it due to the bulk of current VR etc)
I'm sorry, but "my head is the camera" isn't really a gripping enough gimmick to force VR into the game. Matter of fact it leads to a ton of camera angle issues at times and can be detrimental to the game. It was actually really annoying having to move around so much just to peek around a corner and land a jump correctly, instead of just pushing a button or stick to rotate the camera. You do have one thing right though, if it was a traditional game nobody would care about it because it doesn't have said gimmick to make it slightly interesting... from a game quality standpoint it's just a mediocre platformer...

If you don't see a big future for VR, this means you don't even know what VR can do. Simple as that. You don't know that 360 6DoF videos are going to be like literal magic. You don't know that social VR will be unbelievably powerful. You don't know that you can replace any screen and have a better work environment, and the many use cases that entails. You don't know that VR headsets will do mixed reality. You don't know there is a roughly 99% use case cure for motion sickness. You don't know many of the types of games and experiences that are already possible with VR.

So yes, experience and knowledge is everything if you want an informed opinion.
So you counter my point by proving it... lmfao doubling down on your bullshit that I just called out doesn't help your argument, just a protip...

Also what experience do you have with all these future applications that don't exist yet? Stop being that guy...
 
Last edited:
Likes: sahlberg
#72
And this is why VR fanboys will always be the worst kind of fanboys, because they actually are so delusional that they believe the only way people could not enjoy VR is by not trying it. Every criticism can just be dismissed by accusing the critic of not playing VR, or not playing the right software on the right hardware, during the right time of the year wearing a certain type of clothes. Guess what? There are tons of gamers, myself included, who have given VR a fair shake and perhaps even continue to try new games often and still prefer traditional gaming and don't see a big future for VR. Until you guys accept that fact, you will always been looked at as delusional fanboys...
I'm curious as to what you've played? As its already been mentioned you can't not have fun playing games like Astrobot, Beat Saber or play a classic franchise like Gran Turismo and go back to playing flat after a spin in VR and not see the immediate difference. As I've mentioned the last half of 2018 PSVR has come out hard with some pretty epic games that cater to various types of gamers.

I mean to each their own, as far as being delusional, 1.3 million people agree with me that there's something special to PSVR. As it becomes more affordable and more people are actually able to own and really sit down with their own headsets, I'm positive that number will only grow as developers have already come along way with games since PSVR's launch titles.

The icing on the cake here really is still in the works with Media Molecule's 'Dreams' out in 2019, we'll soon be playing user created PSVR content in a Little Big Planet style community with a toolset and customization that offers an experience that's already been said that small indie studio's will utilize to get their foot in the door and create playable content, its been stated that PSVR created levels will need to be completed and tested to ensure players dont get sick, which seems to me like both Sony & Media Molecule are pretty set on growing the PSVR content with quality ensured.

Its your call to play or not to play another addition to regular gaming but I'm willing to bet at one point or another you'll be changing your tune.
 
Likes: DarthBuzzer
May 23, 2018
569
722
250
#73
I'm sorry, but "my head is the camera" isn't really a gripping enough gimmick to force VR into the game. Matter of fact it leads to a ton of camera angle issues at times and can be detrimental to the game. You do have one thing right though, if it was a traditional game nobody would care about it because it doesn't have said gimmick to make it slightly interesting... from a game quality standpoint it's just a mediocre platformer...
How is VR being "forced" into Astro Bot when it was built for VR from the ground up? If you want to just start throwing out uninformed statements we can all play that game. BANGS hates VR because it killed his little puppy dog. VR is not detrimental to Astro Bot, it makes it. And you don't know what Astro Bot would be without VR, because it'd have to be a different game. Super Mario wouldn't be the same if he couldn't jump, either. But he can, so the point is moot.

Aside from the fact that your statement exudes ignorance on the subject matter, we have example of the same games being available in both traditional and VR formats. Resident Evil is better in VR. Wipeout Omega Collection is better in VR.

So what are you basing your "Astro Bot would be just as good or better" on?
Ok, so fair to say you're basing it on nothing then?
 
Likes: DarthBuzzer
Jul 9, 2018
442
180
175
#74
I'm sorry, but "my head is the camera" isn't really a gripping enough gimmick to force VR into the game. Matter of fact it leads to a ton of camera angle issues at times and can be detrimental to the game. It was actually really annoying having to move around so much just to peek around a corner and land a jump correctly, instead of just pushing a button or stick to rotate the camera. You do have one thing right though, if it was a traditional game nobody would care about it because it doesn't have said gimmick to make it slightly interesting... from a game quality standpoint it's just a mediocre platformer...


So you counter my point by proving it... lmfao doubling down on your bullshit that I just called out doesn't help your argument, just a protip...

Also what experience do you have with all these future applications that don't exist yet? Stop being that guy...
Well look at that, you agree it would be inferior afterall.

I didn't prove your point at all, because this is from an objective standpoint. You can take someone, somehow strip them of all emotions but with the knowledge and experience required to have an informed opinion, and they would see a big future for VR. No question.
 
Last edited:
Jan 5, 2012
14,868
569
520
#75
Sad but expected given it only requires a console vs a gaming PC and a more intricate setup process. Hopefully come next gen all the VR sets have equally capable core features and differentiate in other ways (like form factor, resolution, analog stick vs touchpad etc). Move is so inferior to the other VR controllers, I don't understand why Sony didn't make a Move 2 to launch alongside it instead of reuse that :(
Ehh Sony has been slowly adding to VR library to the point where it has somewhat acceptable amount of content for the $250-300 they are asking.

Compared to it Oculus/Vive news are hermetical to the point where news about new games don't even reach tech enthusiast and gamer like me.
 
Last edited:

BANGS

Fresh single BANGS in your area, or in my browser.
Dec 13, 2016
3,883
1,562
440
#76
I'm curious as to what you've played? As its already been mentioned you can't not have fun playing games like Astrobot, Beat Saber or play a classic franchise like Gran Turismo and go back to playing flat after a spin in VR and not see the immediate difference. As I've mentioned the last half of 2018 PSVR has come out hard with some pretty epic games that cater to various types of gamers.

I mean to each their own, as far as being delusional, 1.3 million people agree with me that there's something special to PSVR. As it becomes more affordable and more people are actually able to own and really sit down with their own headsets, I'm positive that number will only grow as developers have already come along way with games since PSVR's launch titles.

The icing on the cake here really is still in the works with Media Molecule's 'Dreams' out in 2019, we'll soon be playing user created PSVR content in a Little Big Planet style community with a toolset and customization that offers an experience that's already been said that small indie studio's will utilize to get their foot in the door and create playable content, its been stated that PSVR created levels will need to be completed and tested to ensure players dont get sick, which seems to me like both Sony & Media Molecule are pretty set on growing the PSVR content with quality ensured.

Its your call to play or not to play another addition to regular gaming but I'm willing to bet at one point or another you'll be changing your tune.
I play new VR games very often, as I do enjoy them in short bursts. Especially new games with new concepts such as you mentioned. One of my best friends is a VR enthusiast and always has new stuff to try out, I also mess around with displays at stores a lot to see what's new. I certainly do have fun playing beat saber... for 5 minutes. After that I remember how much better Um Jammer Lammy is in comparison and play that instead...

I'm not saying there's nothing special about VR, or that it doesn't have a future at all in this industry, as both are clearly true. I'm not calling fans delusional for enjoying it, I'm calling fanboys delusional for dismissing criticism. Look how hard buzzer is trying to sell VR so hard that's he's using science fiction as evidence for how great VR is. Fans can accept that people still prefer traditional gaming to VR for several reasons, fanboys cannot...

I personally will NOT be changing my tune anytime soon. I'm not into sacrificing good gameplay for the sake of immersion, which is exactly what VR is in most cases. And not even real immersion via gameplay and setting, but fake immersion by trying to fool your senses with technology that isn't nearly good enough to actually acheive that goal. I much prefer pressing a button to do a backflip than actually performing one in real life, and I like fast paced action games. VR will never be my cup of tea...

How is VR being "forced" into Astro Bot when it was built for VR from the ground up? If you want to just start throwing out uninformed statements we can all play that game. BANGS hates VR because it killed his little puppy dog. VR is not detrimental to Astro Bot, it makes it. And you don't know what Astro Bot would be without VR, because it'd have to be a different game. Super Mario wouldn't be the same if he couldn't jump, either. But he can, so the point is moot.
More sour grapes, anybody with any reasonable communication skills knows exactly what I'm saying here... VR is basically just the camera in Astro Bot, it could easily be built without that gimmick. Comparing it to a Mario game where he can't jump is not only disingenuous but just goes to show how little you know about very very basic game design...

Well look at that, you agree it would be inferior afterall.

I didn't prove your point at all, but this is from an objective standpoint. You can take someone, somehow strip them of all emotions but with the knowledge and experience required to have an informed opinion, and they would see a big future for VR. No question.
This entire post is delusional from beginning to end, not even gonna pick it apart...
 
Last edited:
Likes: lukilladog

Al3x1s

Neo Member
Nov 24, 2018
639
332
125
#77
Ehh Sony has been slowly adding to VR library to the point where it has somewhat acceptable amount of content for the $250-300 they are asking.

Compared to it Oculus/Vive news are hermetical to the point where news about new games don't even reach tech enthusiast and gamer like me.
Great games are there on PC too, if you only pay attention to the Sony sponsored/developed stuff that's your deal. And their most acclaimed title doesn't even use the Moves.

Anyways don't be so hung up on me pointing out its low points, it has nothing to do with any Sony bias, what I said before applies to the just-behind-in-sales Oculus Go as well. That one has zero setup obv.
 
Last edited:
Aug 20, 2008
9,584
372
825
#78
Sorry your grapes went sour dude, but not Astro Bot is not a gimmick. The forced VR is the gimmick, as Astro Bot would be every bit as good as a traditional game, if not better
I can’t agree with that. As a regular game it would just be another boring (to me) collection focused platformer

The VR made that game great by having to stand around and look at things from odd angles to find the hidden robots etc. It’s not one of those games that you’re just “in” a regular game but it otherwise plays the same (like say RE7).

It’s completely built around using your eyes and moving around to find things. It’s hard to play entirely seated as you so often need to stand and look down at things, turn around and look behind you and so on. Most of the neatest aspects of the game just aren’t possible if playing on the tv with a traditional 3D platformer camera system.
 
Jul 9, 2018
442
180
175
#79
I'm not saying there's nothing special about VR, or that it doesn't have a future at all in this industry, as both are clearly true. I'm not calling fans delusional for enjoying it, I'm calling fanboys delusional for dismissing criticism. Look how hard buzzer is trying to sell VR so hard that's he's using science fiction as evidence for how great VR is. Fans can accept that people still prefer traditional gaming to VR for several reasons, fanboys cannot...
If I mention science fiction, it's stuff like Ready Player One, because that is clearly the future the tech is headed towards. It's less fiction and more future fact, as everything already exists at an earlier stage, and it's not going to be that long until much of that tech is realized just as well as the fiction presents.

I personally will NOT be changing my tune anytime soon. I'm not into sacrificing good gameplay for the sake of immersion, which is exactly what VR is in most cases. I much prefer pressing a button to do a backflip than actually performing one in real life, and I like fast paced action games. VR will never be my cup of tea...
What is the point of this dismissal? It's pointless. Dismiss 1st person VR if you want, but we all know that VR is just fine for 3rd person games and other perspectives. Ergo: You can have fast paced action games like God of War in VR through a 3rd person perspective. You're also saying it will never be your cup of tea despite the fact that the potential is less than 1% realized. There are going to be countless new forms of gameplay and genres that open up as the tech grows and developers do more. So you dismiss everything that hasn't been tested by anyone yet? Bad idea, be more open minded.


More sour grapes, anybody with any reasonable communication skills knows exactly what I'm saying here... VR is basically just the camera in Astro Bot, it could easily be built without that gimmick. Comparing it to a Mario game where he can't jump is not only disingenuous but just goes to show how little you know about very very basic game design...
You don't know a whole lot about game design yourself. I do. I've made games in VR. I'm even questioning if you've played Astro Bot with those thoughts.
 
Last edited:
Jan 5, 2012
14,868
569
520
#80
Great games are there on PC too, if you only pay attention to the Sony sponsored/developed stuff that's your deal. And their most acclaimed title doesn't even use the Moves.

Anyways don't be so hung up on me pointing out its low points, it has nothing to do with any Sony bias, what I said before applies to the just-behind-in-sales Oculus Go as well. That one has zero setup obv.
Sorry but I'm following a dozen or two of pc hardware enthusiast websites, take part in 2 or 3 of their communities as well as watch here+era for game related news.

Whatever is happening with pc vr headsets is completely invisible to people who aren't specifically looking for news about them.
 

BANGS

Fresh single BANGS in your area, or in my browser.
Dec 13, 2016
3,883
1,562
440
#81
I can’t agree with that. As a regular game it would just be another boring (to me) collection focused platformer

The VR made that game great by having to stand around and look at things from odd angles to find the hidden robots etc. It’s not one of those games that you’re just “in” a regular game but it otherwise plays the same (like say RE7).

It’s completely built around using your eyes and moving around to find things. It’s hard to play entirely seated as you so often need to stand and look down at things, turn around and look behind you and so on. Most of the neatest aspects of the game just aren’t possible if playing on the tv with a traditional 3D platformer camera system.
Honestly, all this just proves it's not a very good game at all, as opposed to it being better or worse on VR. But honestly if given the choice of "move your head/body around" or "move the anolgue sticks" is the option here for controlling the camera, yeah i'm gonna pick the stick. Yes, it would need a camera system different that traditional platforming camera systems, but it wouldn't be anything impossible to do, not by a long shot. If moving your head around to control the camera somehow is a revelation and makes an otherwise mediocre game a masterpiece to you, than honestly you just have poor taste IMO...

Put it this way, Guitar Hero controllers are a gimmick. They add immersion but really nothing else. But Guitar hero is still fun because I can bust out a regular controller and play it and still love it. If the same can't be said of a game in VR, it's just a shitty gimmick game and not worth playing...

If I mention science fiction, it's stuff like Ready Player One
Yeah, I've already learned not to take you seriously...
What is the point of this dismissal? It's pointless. Dismiss 1st person VR if you want, but we all know that VR is just fine for 3rd person games and other perspectives. Ergo: You can have fast paced action games like God of War in VR through a 3rd person perspective.
Which is completely pointless. Why the hell would anyone prefer to play a 3rd person game in VR? Yuck...
You're also saying it will never be your cup of tea despite the fact that the potential is less than 1% realized. There are going to be countless new forms of gameplay and genres that open up as the tech grows and developers do more. So you dismiss everything that hasn't been tested by anyone yet? Bad idea, be more open minded.
I will continue to try every new game as it comes out, but I know it will never be my cup of tea. Just like I knew 3D TVs and Kinect would never be my go-to way to game. Also please stop using non-evidence of what VR might be able to do in the distant future as your evidence, it's just stupid...
You don't know a whole lot about game design yourself. I do. I've made games in VR. I'm even questioning if you've played Astro Bot with those thoughts.
And there you go again, I couldn't possibly have even played Astro Bot because I wasn't impressed by it's gimmick camera controls. Again, you will continue to be laughed off and not taken seriously if you keep using that horrible logic... Also you're just plain wrong as again the VR only controls the camera which could just as easily be manipulated with a controller. I really doubt you have any game design experience, either that or you make really shitty games...

VR fanboys really are a delusional bunch...
 
Last edited:

Al3x1s

Neo Member
Nov 24, 2018
639
332
125
#83
Sorry but I'm following a dozen or two of pc hardware enthusiast websites, take part in 2 or 3 of their communities as well as watch here+era for game related news.

Whatever is happening with pc vr headsets is completely invisible to people who aren't specifically looking for news about them.
Not telling you to do anything man, just telling you it's misrepresenting the situation to even begin to imply only Sony puts out worthwhile VR games just because you can't bother looking up what's elsewhere.

The same applies to the "journalists" you do follow if they can't bother doing it either because doing their job is too much hassle so if they're given Sony press releases on a silver platter instead they're good.
 
Dec 3, 2018
241
269
140
#84
I love my PSVR. Absolutely adore it. I'll be honest, with Sony's new censorship policies, I was planning on not going Playstation for the next generation of consoles (their policies don't seem to be limited only to games like Senran Kagura, and would result in the PS5 version of games being inferior to the same game on a different system) - but then I remember the PSVR and how much I love it. I'll get a PS5 explicitly for VR, because I think it really does make a difference.

Right now, the technology isn't there, and yet playing things like Rec Room - which would be a terrible flatscreen game - really shows how much potential this technology has for multiplayer games. The expressiveness of other players is unreal. There's actual body language that comes from just moving your head and hands. Physically ducking behind boxes or dodging lasers, seeing enemies by peaking around corners. It takes a thoroughly mediocre game and makes it into something that is constantly a delight. It's fun because it is VR.

I wouldn't want every game to be VR, but there's so many VR experiences that I've enjoyed that I wouldn't want every game to not be VR either.
 
Aug 20, 2008
9,584
372
825
#85
Honestly, all this just proves it's not a very good game at all, as opposed to it being better or worse on VR. But honestly if given the choice of "move your head/body around" or "move the anolgue sticks" is the option here for controlling the camera, yeah i'm gonna pick the stick. Yes, it would need a camera system different that traditional platforming camera systems, but it wouldn't be anything impossible to do, not by a long shot. If moving your head around to control the camera somehow is a revelation and makes an otherwise mediocre game a masterpiece to you, than honestly you just have poor taste IMO...

Put it this way, Guitar Hero controllers are a gimmick. They add immersion but really nothing else. But Guitar hero is still fun because I can bust out a regular controller and play it and still love it. If the same can't be said of a game in VR, it's just a shitty gimmick game and not worth playing...


Yeah, I've already learned not to take you seriously...

Which is completely pointless. Why the hell would anyone prefer to play a 3rd person game in VR? Yuck...

I will continue to try every new game as it comes out, but I know it will never be my cup of tea. Just like I knew 3D TVs and Kinect would never be my go-to way to game. Also please stop using non-evidence of what VR might be able to do in the distant future as your evidence, it's just stupid...

And there you go again, I couldn't possibly have even played Astro Bot because I wasn't impressed by it's gimmick camera controls. Again, you will continue to be laughed off and not taken seriously if you keep using that horrible logic... Also you're just plain wrong as again the VR only controls the camera which could just as easily be manipulated with a controller. I really doubt you have any game design experience, either that or you make really shitty games...

VR fanboys really are a delusional bunch...
Meh. You have some of the worst opinions I’ve seen on the internet in a long time, and that’s saying a lot. Won’t be viewing your posts anymore.
 
Likes: DarthBuzzer

BANGS

Fresh single BANGS in your area, or in my browser.
Dec 13, 2016
3,883
1,562
440
#86
Meh. You have some of the worst opinions I’ve seen on the internet in a long time, and that’s saying a lot. Won’t be viewing your posts anymore.
That really hurts man, I'm not sure I'm going to be able to sleep tonight...
 
May 23, 2018
569
722
250
#87
More sour grapes, anybody with any reasonable communication skills knows exactly what I'm saying here... VR is basically just the camera in Astro Bot, it could easily be built without that gimmick. Comparing it to a Mario game where he can't jump is not only disingenuous but just goes to show how little you know about very very basic game design...
Yes, removing VR from Astro Bot would be exactly like making a Mario game where he can't jump. VR is as intrinsic to Astro Bot as jumping is to Mario. Do I make myself clear? Just as you proclaim Astro Bot could be built without VR, Mario could be built without jumping, Grand Theft Auto could be built without driving,, and Tekken could be built without fighting. So what? It can be done, but in all cases they'd be different games than they are now. Surely someone with your "very, very basic game design" knowledge should realize this. You are the one with sour grapes and without "reasonable communication skills" because as we found out, VR killed your kitten.
 
Likes: DarthBuzzer
#88
I play new VR games very often, as I do enjoy them in short bursts. Especially new games with new concepts such as you mentioned. One of my best friends is a VR enthusiast and always has new stuff to try out, I also mess around with displays at stores a lot to see what's new. I certainly do have fun playing beat saber... for 5 minutes. After that I remember how much better Um Jammer Lammy is in comparison and play that instead...

I'm not saying there's nothing special about VR, or that it doesn't have a future at all in this industry, as both are clearly true. I'm not calling fans delusional for enjoying it, I'm calling fanboys delusional for dismissing criticism. Look how hard buzzer is trying to sell VR so hard that's he's using science fiction as evidence for how great VR is. Fans can accept that people still prefer traditional gaming to VR for several reasons, fanboys cannot...
Thats abit more of a reasonable response and I'm ok with your criticism. I'm still curious if you've sat down with something like Astrobot or Moss for longer than 20 minutes. I do think science fiction is where the general public with no experience expects VR to be, throw on a pair of glasses, no cords and hit up the poon saloon on the holodeck but in your PSVR headset for the evening which its no where close and I think that disappoints most people but its apparently where people want it to be, glasses, no wires, ect; and like traditional gaming it'll take time to get there as it did for online multiplayer, HD, 4K, 60fps, ect;

I would say the more time in the more you'll probably get out of it, mall kiosks or displays don't really count, who's comfortable 'schweating' into a shared VR headset for 10 minutes a turn. Beat Saber depending on the level maybe does need more breaks as the longest play through I've done was about 2hrs through the early stages and replaying a couple favs. Um Jammer Lammy, or Pa Rappa the Rapper I would say is not better than Beat Saber, although its the next iteration of it, again to each their own.

I beefed up my collection pretty quick after getting my Skyrim bundle, games were cheap and there are some that I've gone back and played to appreciate even more like Skyrim and RIGS and some like The Inpatient that I've come to appreciate less. To say your tastes dont change as your VR awareness and ability to play longer in VR is something that comes with longer play sessions.
 
Last edited:
Likes: BANGS
Jan 5, 2012
14,868
569
520
#89
Not telling you to do anything man, just telling you it's misrepresenting the situation to even begin to imply only Sony puts out worthwhile VR games just because you can't bother looking up what's elsewhere.

The same applies to the "journalists" you do follow if they can't bother doing it either because doing their job is too much hassle so if they're given Sony press releases on a silver platter instead they're good.
What I'm trying to tell you is that people responsible for pc VR headsets are completely failing on the marketing and PR front. It's not enough to have hardware and content - they need to tell potential customers they have it - otherwise it might as well not exists.

And they need to give people chance to actually buy it - I see PS VR in mainstream electronic shop chains and it had plenty of presence on Black Friday - meanwhile I think I saw anything resembling Vive promotion once in computer parts retailer store.
 

BANGS

Fresh single BANGS in your area, or in my browser.
Dec 13, 2016
3,883
1,562
440
#90
Yes, removing VR from Astro Bot would be exactly like making a Mario game where he can't jump. VR is as intrinsic to Astro Bot as jumping is to Mario. Do I make myself clear? Just as you proclaim Astro Bot could be built without VR, Mario could be built without jumping, Grand Theft Auto could be built without driving,, and Tekken could be built without fighting. So what? It can be done, but in all cases they'd be different games than they are now. Surely someone with your "very, very basic game design" knowledge should realize this. You are the one with sour grapes and without "reasonable communication skills" because as we found out, VR killed your kitten.
No sorry, but you are just plain wrong. The VR elements of Astro Bot can easily be controlled with a traditional controller or perhaps even modern motion controls in the dualshock or joycons. It's nothing like taking jumping out of Mario or cars out of GTA. VR adds nothing to the overall experience other than fake immersion. But my brain isn't so easily fooled so the entire time I knew I wasn't a giant robot following around a smaller robot, I knew I was a guy moving around like an idiot just to play a game that shouldn't have such silly forced gimmicks. You're becoming a parody of yourself now and perhaps you should think before you post a bit...

Thats abit more of a reasonable response and I'm ok with your criticism. I'm still curious if you've sat down with something like Astrobot or Moss for longer than 20 minutes. I do think science fiction is where the general public with no experience expects VR to be, throw on a pair of glasses, no cords and hit up the poon saloon on the holodeck but in your PSVR headset for the evening which its no where close and I think that disappoints most people but its apparently where people want it to be, glasses, no wires, ect; and like traditional gaming it'll take time to get there as it did for online multiplayer, HD, 4K, 60fps, ect;

I would say the more time in the more you'll probably get out of it, mall kiosks or displays don't really count, who's comfortable 'schweating' into a shared VR headset for 10 minutes a turn. Beat Saber depending on the level maybe does need more breaks as the longest play through I've done was about 2hrs through the early stages and replaying a couple favs. Um Jammer Lammy, or Pa Rappa the Rapper I would say is not better than Beat Saber, although its the next iteration of it, again to each their own.

I beefed up my collection pretty quick after getting my Skyrim bundle, games were cheap and there are some that I've gone back and played to appreciate even more like Skyrim and RIGS and some like The Inpatient that I've come to appreciate less. To say your tastes dont change as your VR awareness and ability to play longer in VR is something that comes with longer play sessions.
I played Astrobot for like 2 hours lol. That's honestly like 105 more minutes than I should have played it, but I like to give everything a fair shake. Just doesn't do it for me, the whole time I kept thinking how stupid it was that I gotta do all this moving around just for a goofy camera gimmick...
 
Last edited:
Aug 20, 2008
9,584
372
825
#91
What I'm trying to tell you is that people responsible for pc VR headsets are completely failing on the marketing and PR front. It's not enough to have hardware and content - they need to tell potential customers they have it - otherwise it might as well not exists.

And they need to give people chance to actually buy it - I see PS VR in mainstream electronic shop chains and it had plenty of presence on Black Friday - meanwhile I think I saw anything resembling Vive promotion once in computer parts retailer store.
As above, I just think it’s tough as a lot of people don’t have desktops anymore, much less gaming PCs. We and our friends are upper middle class and I don’t think any of them but me (gaming) and my wife (works at home crunching huge data a lot) have desktops. Most just have a work-provided laptop and maybe an iPad.

So that’s tougher to market to the general public as it’s a tough sell to shell out for a desktop and the VR gear. So most marketing is limited to PC gamers. Vs PSVR where a lot of people already have a PS4, and if not the cost of getting one is way lower than a new desktop setup.
 
Last edited:
Dec 3, 2018
241
269
140
#92
No sorry, but you are just plain wrong. The VR elements of Astro Bot can easily be controlled with a traditional controller or perhaps even modern motion controls in the dualshock or joycons.
I think something functionally similar could be achieved, but I think it would lose the tactile pleasure of watching the bot bounce around you, tracking it with your head as he flies high above you and then lands on your face, inches away from your eyes. It's not that you can't do it, just that it wouldn't be nearly as fun.
 
May 23, 2018
569
722
250
#94
No sorry, but you are just plain wrong. The VR elements of Astro Bot can easily be controlled with a traditional controller or perhaps even modern motion controls in the dualshock or joycons. It's nothing like taking jumping out of Mario or cars out of GTA. You're becoming a parody of yourself now and perhaps you should think before you post a bit...
The only parody here is you. Ok, BANGS. You tell me, what video game controller allows you to control an in-game camera at a 1:1 ratio with your head?

I mean, you keep making this statement, so I assume it would be nothing for you to reel off several games that offer the same type of 1:1 camera movement with your head that VR offers via a controller or "joycon." Please list these games, I'd love to see their camera system.
 
Last edited:
Likes: DarthBuzzer

Al3x1s

Neo Member
Nov 24, 2018
639
332
125
#95
The only parody here is you. Ok, BANGS. You tell me, what video game controller allows you to control an in-game camera at a 1:1 ratio with your head?

I mean, you keep making this statement, so I assume it would be nothing for you to reel off several games that offer the same type of 1:1 camera movement with your head that that VR offers via a controller or "joycon." Please list these games, I'd love to see their camera system.
He's not saying you'd control it with your head, just that you would control it the same way you control cameras in any other first person games with either an analog stick or the gyro controls. Except instead of tracking enemies with the camera movement like in COD you'd track the Bot as you guide him around the levels. Of course it wouldn't be nearly as immersing. I haven't played Astro Bot, I don't know if he has a point, just explaining it for you. Other first person VR games have translated to non-VR versions decently. Like Battlezone. There are tons of other games with optional VR support like Elite or RE7 or whatever flight sim or racing games. Clearly it's not nearly as immersing out of VR but it's a viable way to play these games since the VR doesn't actually alter their gameplay much, only the sense of presence and wow factor and immersion. It's not like games that use the 1:1 motion controllers to map your hands and let you physically interact with objects/weapons/enemies/the environment (or even room scale games where you walk around for total immersion) which would need a full rework to work outside VR and be lesser games for it (like even the simpler shooting games where you aim like a real gun but completely lose that factor if you make a shooter with conventional controls). Again, I dunno if this would work for Astro Bot, I haven't played it, just explaining his point, or how I understand it at least.
 
Last edited:
Aug 20, 2008
9,584
372
825
#96
The only parody here is you. Ok, BANGS. You tell me, what video game controller allows you to control an in-game camera at a 1:1 ratio with your head?

I mean, you keep making this statement, so I assume it would be nothing for you to reel off several games that offer the same type of 1:1 camera movement with your head that VR offers via a controller or "joycon." Please list these games, I'd love to see their camera system.
Much less the level of immersion you get from looking around just like you normally do vs moving a virtual camera with a thumbstick.

I think a big part of it is some people just aren’t that interested in immersive experiences. The people that are pure gameplay/focus/challenge driven types are going to get less from VR than those of us who game primarily for escapist experiences.

I tend to get bored playing a regular platformer as I’m just not that into pure gameplay stuff and mostly stick with immersive and/or narrative-driven experiences. I love walking sims and visual novels for instance. The immersion of VR makes me enjoy a game like Astrobot that I otherwise wouldn’t. Much like how I loved Guitar Hero, but don't like any rhythm games that just use a regular controller or touch screen. Or how the Wii Sports games would be boring as hell with regular controls.

Those types of things and VR can simply make games fun and engaging that otherwise wouldn’t be to most people with traditional controls. And the gameplay-focused people just aren’t going to appreciate that as much as they play games mosrly for the gameplay mechanics.
 
Likes: BANGS
May 23, 2018
569
722
250
#97
He's not saying you'd control it with your head, just that you would control it the same way you control cameras in any other first person games with either an analog stick or the gyro controls. Except instead of tracking enemies with the camera movement like in COD you'd track the Bot as you guide him around the levels. Of course it wouldn't be nearly as immersing. I haven't played Astro Bot, I don't know if he has a point, just explaining it for you. Other first person VR games have translated to non-VR versions decently. Like Battlezone. There are tons of other games with optional VR support like Elite or whatever flight sim or racing games. Clearly it's not nearly as immersing out of VR but it's a viable way to play these games since the VR doesn't actually alter their gameplay much, only the sense of presence and wow factor and immersion. It's not like games that use the 1:1 motion controllers to map your hands and let you physically interact with objects/weapons/enemies/the environment (or even room scale games where you walk around for total immersion) which would need a full rework to work outside VR and be lesser games for it (like even the simpler shooting games where you aim like a real gun but completely lose that factor if you make a shooter with conventional controls). Again, I dunno if this would work for Astro Bot, I haven't played it, just explaining his point, or how I understand it at least.
Yeah, I get as Sqorin said you may be able to achieve something functionally similar, but that's only half the issue. What you would miss in addition to your movement that you CAN'T get outside of VR is the immersion and the visuals, that "wow" factor that when done like it's done in Astro Bot, is half the charm. When you're underwater and Astro Bot gets stuck to your face, when your facing a giant boss who comes within inches of your face and swoops right at you, this are visual elements that again, if you take away VR you remove, and it becomes not the same game that everyone is going gaga over, which is my point. It can be manufactured flat with concessions, but it would no longer be the same game.
 
Jul 9, 2018
442
180
175
#99
If moving your head around to control the camera somehow is a revelation and makes an otherwise mediocre game a masterpiece to you, than honestly you just have poor taste IMO...

Put it this way, Guitar Hero controllers are a gimmick. They add immersion but really nothing else. But Guitar hero is still fun because I can bust out a regular controller and play it and still love it. If the same can't be said of a game in VR, it's just a shitty gimmick game and not worth playing...
You really think they have poor taste? Look at you, saying that a game using a certain aspect of VR that can't be played without it is a shitty gimmick. You don't even stop at gimmick, you say shitty gimmick, meaning really bad.

Your taste is abysmal and everyone can see that. Congratulations, it seems you've proven yourself to be the laughing stock of this thread.

Which is completely pointless. Why the hell would anyone prefer to play a 3rd person game in VR? Yuck...
Pointless, huh. Well maybe you think so. I mean clearly you do, but that's such a minority opinion that it doesn't have any weight in what will happen with support, and what many people will enjoy. Most people realize there is a huge benefit to 3rd person VR once they try it.

I will continue to try every new game as it comes out, but I know it will never be my cup of tea. Just like I knew 3D TVs and Kinect would never be my go-to way to game. Also please stop using non-evidence of what VR might be able to do in the distant future as your evidence, it's just stupid...
Yes, I will always try every new food recipe that comes out. But I know that Italian food will never be my cup of tea, no matter what. Doesn't matter if it's completely different than what came before, it's just not my cup of tea. Because I'm so enlightened that I know everything. <- That's you.

Also, non-evidence? It's literally common sense and expected. Even if we never get a new game type or gameplay with current VR headsets, future VR headsets will drastically change the way input and games work. But it would be absurd to even assume that there isn't a lot left to explore even now, because there are many ideas that I can think of that haven't been tried.


And there you go again, I couldn't possibly have even played Astro Bot because I wasn't impressed by it's gimmick camera controls. Again, you will continue to be laughed off and not taken seriously if you keep using that horrible logic... Also you're just plain wrong as again the VR only controls the camera which could just as easily be manipulated with a controller. I really doubt you have any game design experience, either that or you make really shitty games...

VR fanboys really are a delusional bunch...
VR only controls the camera. Is that why you have a DS4 inside the world that can be manipulated in space and used for interaction, and wouldn't work outside of VR? Seems like the Astro Bot you played is not the one everyone knows.

Look at how many people are agaisnt you. Now I normally wouldn't care, because I've been in a 1v100 situation myself. But these people are actually informed, unlike yourself. When you have several informed people in the conversation refuting your comments, you just know that there is something flawed with your argument. I'm not the laughing stock; you are.
 
Last edited:

BANGS

Fresh single BANGS in your area, or in my browser.
Dec 13, 2016
3,883
1,562
440
I think something functionally similar could be achieved, but I think it would lose the tactile pleasure of watching the bot bounce around you, tracking it with your head as he flies high above you and then lands on your face, inches away from your eyes. It's not that you can't do it, just that it wouldn't be nearly as fun.
Exactly. It's an added gimmick that makes an otherwise mediocre game into something mildly interesting...

Much less the level of immersion you get from looking around just like you normally do vs moving a virtual camera with a thumbstick.

I think a big part of it is some people just aren’t that interested in immersive experiences. The people that are pure gameplay/focus/challenge driven types are going to get less from VR than those of us who game primarily for escapist experiences.

I tend to get bored playing a regular platformer as I’m just not that into pure gameplay stuff and mostly stick with immersive and/or narrative-driven experiences. I love walking sims and visual novels for instance. The immersion of VR makes me enjoy a game like Astrobot that I otherwise wouldn’t. Much like how I loved Guitar Hero, but don't like any rhythm games that just use a regular controller or touch screen. Or how the Wii Sports games would be boring as hell with regular controls.

Those types of things and VR can simply make games fun and engaging that otherwise wouldn’t be to most people with traditional controls. And the gameplay-focused people just aren’t going to appreciate that as much as they play games mosrly for the gameplay mechanics.
He's not saying you'd control it with your head, just that you would control it the same way you control cameras in any other first person games with either an analog stick or the gyro controls. Except instead of tracking enemies with the camera movement like in COD you'd track the Bot as you guide him around the levels. Of course it wouldn't be nearly as immersing. I haven't played Astro Bot, I don't know if he has a point, just explaining it for you. Other first person VR games have translated to non-VR versions decently. Like Battlezone. There are tons of other games with optional VR support like Elite or RE7 or whatever flight sim or racing games. Clearly it's not nearly as immersing out of VR but it's a viable way to play these games since the VR doesn't actually alter their gameplay much, only the sense of presence and wow factor and immersion. It's not like games that use the 1:1 motion controllers to map your hands and let you physically interact with objects/weapons/enemies/the environment (or even room scale games where you walk around for total immersion) which would need a full rework to work outside VR and be lesser games for it (like even the simpler shooting games where you aim like a real gun but completely lose that factor if you make a shooter with conventional controls). Again, I dunno if this would work for Astro Bot, I haven't played it, just explaining his point, or how I understand it at least.
So refreshing to see someone be honest about this subject, as well as understand my point of view. Thank you my friends...